What happens when institutions claim to measure “merit” while pretending history never happened?

In Part I of Merit Without Memory, Steven Teske dismantles the comforting fiction that neutrality is the same as fairness. Following the Supreme Court’s decision in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, many universities and institutions rushed to adopt so-called “race-neutral” approaches—especially class-based metrics—while quietly erasing the historical realities that shaped opportunity in the first place.

This episode argues that forgetting is not passive. It is strategic.

Teske explains why the law did not require institutional amnesia, how class-based approaches fail to address racial discrimination that operates independently of poverty, and why discretion—when stripped of historical context—becomes the perfect hiding place for bias.

This is not an abstract debate about admissions formulas. It is a warning about what happens when merit is severed from memory—and neutrality becomes camouflage.

Part I sets the trap. Part II exposes the cost

Justice ReDesigned is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Thanks for reading Justice ReDesigned! This post is public so feel free to share it.

Get full access to Justice ReDesigned at steventeske.substack.com/subscribe