Slashdot Mirror
Supreme Court Upholds Michigan's Ban On Affirmative Action In College Admissions
Hugh Pickens DOT Com writes: "The Supreme Court, by a vote of 6 — 2, has upheld a Michigan law banning the use of racial criteria in college admissions, finding that a lower court did not have the authority to set aside the measure approved in a 2006 referendum supported by 58% of voters. 'This case is not about how the debate about racial preferences should be resolved. It is about who may resolve it,' wrote Justice Anthony Kennedy. 'Michigan voters used the initiative system to bypass public officials who were deemed not responsive to the concerns of a majority of the voters with respect to a policy of granting race-based preferences that raises difficult and delicate issues.' Kennedy's core opinion in the Michigan case seems to exalt referenda as a kind of direct democracy that the courts should be particularly reluctant to disturb. This might be a problem for same-sex marriage opponents if a future Supreme Court challenge involves a state law or constitutional amendment enacted by voters.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor reacted sharply in disagreeing with the decision in a 58 page dissent. 'For members of historically marginalized groups, which rely on the federal courts to protect their constitutional rights, the decision can hardly bolster hope for a vision of democracy (PDF) that preserves for all the right to participate meaningfully and equally in self-government.' The decision was the latest step in a legal and political battle over whether state colleges can use race and gender as a factor in choosing what students to admit. Michigan has said minority enrollment at its flagship university, the University of Michigan, has not gone down since the measure was passed. Civil rights groups dispute those figures and say other states have seen fewer African-American and Hispanic students attending highly competitive schools, especially in graduate level fields like law, medicine, and science."
Justice Sonia Sotomayor reacted sharply in disagreeing with the decision in a 58 page dissent. 'For members of historically marginalized groups, which rely on the federal courts to protect their constitutional rights, the decision can hardly bolster hope for a vision of democracy (PDF) that preserves for all the right to participate meaningfully and equally in self-government.' The decision was the latest step in a legal and political battle over whether state colleges can use race and gender as a factor in choosing what students to admit. Michigan has said minority enrollment at its flagship university, the University of Michigan, has not gone down since the measure was passed. Civil rights groups dispute those figures and say other states have seen fewer African-American and Hispanic students attending highly competitive schools, especially in graduate level fields like law, medicine, and science."
Honestly I'm really not sure how somebody like her gets appointed there to begin with. When you look at her opinions, she always votes in favor of any action that is about minority empowerment, regardless of whether or not it is fair. If not racism, that is at the very least a pretty clear indication of bias. Her background explains it too, she has the upbringing of a classic feminazi (though admittedly she doesn't act the part most of the time.)
Careful with names containing L slashdot.org/~AiphaWolf_HK slashdot.org/~AlphaWoif_HK slashdot.org/~AiphaWoif_HK
Exactly how is affirmative action not a racist tool ?
I grew up down the street from Justice Sonia Sotomayor but I wasn't in the right type of "disadvantaged" people.
Actually, we grew-up wishing we had at least as much as the "disadvantaged" had.
Our apartment sucked, worse than NYC housing projects, no medical, many days the only thing between hunger and the next paycheck 2 days away was a stick of butter and a few cups of rice or noodles.
We tried to get help, but again, we weren't the right type of "disadvantaged" !
She, being in a "disadvantaged" family, received help to attend school, help with rent (housing projects) and more.
What a set of fucken balls Sonia grew !!
By hard work, 7 days a week, sometimes 2 and 3 jobs I got out of the Bronx mess only to discover that where I moved part of my taxes goes to help towns that are considered "disadvantaged" school areas. They get more money per student and have highest failures. I've been turned down for jobs because I wasn't the right type of "disadvantaged". So, exactly how is this fucken "affirmative" shit supposed to be fair ? Being of family that fled Europe with only the clothes on the back so how made us not "disadvantaged" because of a white background? Fuck you Sonia !
You seem to have a certain idea of how affirmative action works that is different than mine.
That's OK, being wrong doesn't mean your a bad person, just misguided. Afirmamtive Action Programs are racial discrimination pure and simple and contrary to MLK's vision of a colors-blind society.
Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
Here goes my karma out the window...
I tend to think that a candidate’s belief in an imaginary sky fairy who sends psychic messages to a man (never a woman!) in Rome that all his followers must comply with or else spend an eternity in burning agony is somewhat more material of a limitation to said candidate’s ability to lead than is the color of their skin.
You can say what you like about Obama’s religious beliefs or lack thereof; but all else being equal, a Catholic president of any race would cause me more concern (a goodly bit) than a non-Catholic president of any particular race (no concern whatsoever, at least for race, though other religious belief systems are equally or more troubling).
Personally, I’d substitute “Catholic” with “devoutly religious, any denomination,” but since we started talking about JFK...