Skip to comments.Sotomayor: Affirmative action options donít work
Posted on 06/23/2014 12:26:25 AM PDT by Olog-hai
Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor rejected on Sunday the notion that alternatives to affirmative action such as income or residency could achieve similar results in diversifying the nations colleges and universities. [ ]
Sotomayor is the first Hispanic on the Supreme Court and graduated from Princeton University. She said her alma mater could fill its freshman class with students who scored perfectly on undergraduate metrics, but it chooses not to do so because it would not create a diverse class based on standards the school considers important for success in life.
(Excerpt) Read more at hosted.ap.org ...
Did she talk about anti-Asian quotas that are commonly used to keep more qualified Asians out of elite colleges and universities under the guise of affirmative action?
Hey Sonia, Does Princeton give a participation trophy? Life doesn’t.
Apparently she believes that learning America is no longer a meritocracy is important to the future of our youth.
So is she saying that knowing black and hispanic people is how people succeed in life?
I mean, that’s probably how liberals really think things work, but I gotta say, as a manager in a company I have never had cause to ask a potential hire if they knew any black or hispanic people. All I ever asked them were questions that I felt would demonstrate to me whether or not they knew how to do the job. Likewise, no hiring manager has ever asked me about the ethnicity of my acquaintances.
“She said her alma mater could fill its freshman class with students who scored perfectly on undergraduate metrics, but it chooses not to do so because it would not create a diverse class”
So if they only took the best, blacks and Hispanics would not be amoung them? Thats pretty damn racist isn’t it?
Sotomayor says blacks and hispanics are stupid
I am well aware that the Supreme Court has constructed an intricate web of rationalizations to justify favoring one race over another in college admissions. At the end of the day the reality remains the same, the leftist vision of society as one made up of blocks of races, sexes, creeds, and classes is one that trumps the Constitution.
When asked whether alternatives to affirmative action would work, she replied making two mistakes. First, as a Justice she takes off her robes and presumes herself to be a sociologist or an anthropologist, and tells us that other solutions that might be devised by a legislature, will not work. What the hell does a Supreme Court justice know about that?
Second, the accumulated set of rationalizations for affirmative action gives her cover to assume that government has the right to favor one race over another in college admissions. Let's examine just one of those rationalizations.
She says that legacies have a "slight advantage" in gaining admission. That is not a race-based discrimination. Why is that discrimination, nonracial and perfectly legitimate, held up as a justification for a race-based discrimination? Is she saying that one wrong justifies another? Or is she as a leftist saying, your legacies are white and rich and my value system favors the nonwhite therefore I'm going to put my robes back on and order you to discriminate in favor of the racial colors that I most admire.
Affirmative action even carries a hint of alliteration with Animal Farm
Wise Latinas can’t compete with wise White people or Asians. Wonder if her senior thesis was written in crayon on a placemat like the first Wookie’s was.
The Ivy League is less impressive every day.
I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.
Somewhat misleading. From the headline, one would almost think she’s against them. Not the case. She’s for bigger and better and more effective.
Alternatives to AA don’t work? Who cares?
Equal outcome isn’t a right, while being treated equally under the law is a right.
Alternatives to the freedom of speech also fail to mute bad speech, so?
So a Supreme Court Justice now agrees that discrimination against an entire class of people - Caucasians who aren’t descended from the Caucasians of Spain - is not only legitimate, but a compelling national interest?
So much for the 14th amendment! Equal Protection is Dead! Long Live dogmatic discrimination!
Guess we can bring back Deed Covenants, Legal Segregation, Separate But Equal, and all the other legal discrimination that was practiced from 1865 to 1965.
Who knew! We had to have a Wise Latina from the hated, decrepit Spanish Empire to enlighten us!
Hmm not sure 'doing good' is their real motive.
She has been very damn vocal lately.
My personal feeling is that it is inappropriate for Supreme Court judges.
She should shut her trap and listen to the far side of the court...
College won't make them better.
Why work when you can get sh** for free.
No one has ever shown that “diversity” is a positive.
“Affirmative action” is illegal, unconstitutional and wrong, even if there are laws permitting it. Those laws are invalid.
The Wise Latina also approves of discriminating against Asians who worked to get a perfect SAT and perfect grades: the Chinese student whose family descended from Chinese railroad workers, the Vietnamese student whose parents boarded the helicopter in the famous picture of the fall of Saigon, the Korean American whose parents escaped from the North, and the Japanese student whose family came here in 1945. Those Asians (or their families) started with huge disadvantages and overcame them through hard work. The Wise Latina thinks those who look like her or like Obama should be favored over real scholars who look Asian. If she wasn’t so Wise, I would assume she was racist.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.