People are unequal. Some are smarter, taller, or just better than others. No amount of 'equity' will make them equal. Friedrich Hayek wrote, "There is all the difference in the world between treating people equally and attempting to make them equal. While the first is the condition of a free society, the second means, as De Tocqueville described it, 'a new form of servitude.'"

Equality is achieved by providing equal levels of opportunity and assistance to all segments of society. Equity is achieved by providing unequal levels of opportunity and assistance depending on specific needs or abilities for segments of society. Laws such as the Civil Rights Act of 1964 provide equality, while policies such as affirmative action provide equity.

The Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause requires the United States government to provide equal protection, which refers to the idea that it may not deny people equal protection of its governing laws. The Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause requires states to practice equal protection.

However, the federal or a state government is allowed to discriminate against individuals if the discrimination satisfies the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause. Any plausible and legitimate reason for the discrimination (such as equity) is sufficient to render it constitutional. But such laws are examined by the courts under 'heightened scrutiny.' The government must have compelling reasons to justify the discrimination. Kamala Harris's 'equity' does discriminate. Her definition of 'equity' is compelling reason enough for her to justify the discrimination.

Harris, no mental giant, is using equity to trash equality (the absence of discrimination). She denigrates the concept of equality expressed in the Equal Protection Clauses in the 5th and 14th amendments. Attacking 'equality' jeopardizes public support and surrenders intellectual and legal resources -- including laws and judicial decisions -- otherwise available for enforceable changes.

Why is she doing this? Does she actually view 'equity' as non-discriminatory? This video, which surfaced during her 2020 presidential campaign, illustrates discrimination in the name of equity. I'll wager she thinks this video's message will go away if her actions are numerous enough.

Kamala Harris says, "There's a big difference between equality and equity." Harris contrasted, in this video, equal treatment -- all people getting the same thing -- with equitable treatment -- "we all end up at the same place."

It's the final sentence of the video that's causing Harris problems. She wants to achieve "equality of outcome" via government policy. British-American author Andrew Sullivan tweeted "Equitable treatment means we all end up in the same place. That's equality of outcomes enforced by the government. They used to call that communism."

Ironically one of her 2020 presidential campaign video's critics was Liz Cheney (R-WY) who tweeted, "Sounds just like Karl Marx. A century of history has shown where that path leads. We all embrace equal opportunity, but government-enforced equality of outcomes is Marxism."

Delivered with all the sarcasm I can muster: 'Great policy -- worked well when Kimberly Cheatle was appointed head of the Secret Service.'

Ryan Bourne sums up Harris' position nicely. The problem with Harris' perspective is that it's ridiculous to think that when treated equitably, people will end up in the same place. There's no reason to expect different individuals (or different groups) to achieve the same economic outcomes or be equally represented in society when everything else about their upbringings, education, work experience, and/or other characteristics are made the same. There is no reason to expect that, even if 'equity' (as Harris defines it) could be achieved, we would all 'end up in the same place.' Harris' definition of equity places a person in an impersonal, impermeable, all-encompassing group identity. Government-enforced equality of outcome would transform America with a government dedicated to preserving unalienable rights into an omniscient do-gooder.

Harris's concept omits another reality: To bring people of two different starting points to the same result, one must treat them unequally, must apply different standards to their actions, must believe that any ends justify any means.

I close with a counter to Harris' view: "Outcomes are often unequal, and if [they occur] due to the free pursuit of our ambitions, that's ok."

Warren Beatty has created a web page that facilitates quick responses and/or comments to anything you consider outrageous: quick-rant.atwebpages.com

Image: Quinn Dombrowski