In a ruling inciting the hive mind of the Murder hornet/Killer Bee/Yellow Jacket death star nest of the radicalized American Bar Association legal hierarchy, Florida’s highest court struck down the organization’s ridiculous policy attempting to indoctrinate its own members through procedural brainwashing.
For society, the under the radar favorable decision only because of the next surge of Covid-19 generated hysteria and mental fatigue, means that the regressive and destructive quota system may finally be marked for demolition. At least one can hope.
Currently, lawyers in the Sunshine state are required to regularly complete continuing education credits (CLE) as a redundantly exhaustive condition in renewing their legal licenses deeming them eligible to practice. While the highly inefficient and backward policy is a product of the unrelenting and pretentious lobbying efforts of the aforementioned ABA, the leftist agency apparently provides a unique style of governance to legions of attorneys. Of course, the entity remains one of many options for available to solicitors to reup their professional certifications, an irony that is not lost on public policy watchdogs. While, Florida attorneys have a myriad of choices for CLE training programs, ranging from the ABA to a cavalcade of non-profit organization, this is where it gets messy.
In offering CLE credits, the organization had placed a stringent diversity requirement on the demographic makeup of the symposiums, in mandating that a minimum number of what the association quantifies as a “diverse group” be present as speakers at the events, the proportion based on the total number of panelists teaching god knows what. The ABA’s suspect verbiage surrounding the politically correct vehicle of coercion defines qualified members of the diverse group fit to lead the overbearing TED talks as “women, racial and ethnic minorities, persons with disabilities, and persons of differing sexual orientations and gender identities”. Notably absent from the melting pot roster of enlightenment are white males with standard preferences.
Included within the “diverse group” fit to lead the overbearing TED talks “women, racial and ethnic minorities, persons with disabilities, and persons of differing sexual orientations and gender identities”. Notably absent from the melting pot roster of enlightenment are white males with standard preferences, even though individuals afflicted by these conditions may meet or even exceed the criteria for a qualified panelist.
Previous to the infusion of sensibility by the high court in Tallahassee with the 6-1 resounding decision, tutorials attended and credits earned could be nullified if the singular, yet ridiculously daunting toxic and overtly inclusive condition was not met. If that doesn’t spell quota with a glaring capital “Q”, than the epic failure and gross indifference by the Justice Department to the strong allegations against Yale’s aggressive affirmative action admission that deliberate nefarious practices resulted in discrimination against Asian-Americans and white applicants turns out to be a languishing series of “zzz’s”. With a ruling now on the books addressing the unethical and illegal fabrication of headcounts based on race and not merit, the proverbial floodgates are now open for appeals and new lawsuits targeting ineffectual legislation and processes aimed at compromising fundamental rights.
As codified preferential treatment threatens every aspect of life in a horrifying social experiment that is the bi-product of surrender over four decades, the special interest lobby continues to assault the mainstream in manipulating politics and media. In the aftermath of forty years of cyclical restructuring supported by a deluge of irreversible measures, a backlash against the destructive elements of systemic exploitative methods are crystallizing through legal interpretation that may seem insignificant, but will prevent the near future from being tarnished for the sake of a few embracing the anomaly and not the greater good.
Florida’s fortuitous political tapestry of relative political balance, considering the extremism of the West coast, has equated to a balanced selection of justices, a minor miracle in weighing that the ABA is complicit in the judge selection process being marred by intimidating tactics towards candidates adhering to right of center beliefs. As Conservative candidates are subject to a heightened level of shameless scrutiny which skews the ecosystem of purported justice, one side of the ledger is incessantly and blindly pursued. With the system of quotas on the chopping block it is all but a guarantee that the left will devise another means of cheating to forward their counterproductive agenda of gaining ultimate control.