Posted on 02/21/2012 7:08:06 PM PST by jazusamo
It’s time for the Supreme Court to negate affirmative action
Defenders of racially-based preferential treatment argue that affirmative action was part of the original intent of the framers of the 14th Amendment. They should study more history.
On Tuesday, the Supreme Court agreed to hear a case on race-conscious admission policies in the Texas public-university system. Abigail Noel Fisher sued the University of Texas in 2008 when her application was rejected when less academically qualified minority students were accepted. Ms. Fisher argues the race-based admissions policy violated her rights under the 14th Amendment, specifically the equal protection clause which says no state shall “deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
Texas counters, “Those who drafted and ratified the 14th Amendment did not establish the principle of ‘colorblind’ government that opponents of race-conscious admissions so often invoke.” The 14th Amendment has proved to be the most elastic of any of the additions to the Constitution and the most useful for justifying the type of government activism liberals advocate. Contrary to Texas’ interpretation, selective preferential treatment based on race was not part of the original intent of the amendment. Racial preferences were precisely what it sought to eliminate.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
Kinda confirms what we’ve known all along...
There are just some people (judges) that will never understand, much less interpret what the Constitution and its Amendments really mean...
I guess most were part of the “participation class” of vunerables that got a trophy for just participating, but not really winning certain things...
2+2=5
“Ok, Johnny, thats very good, you tried...Here’s your trophy!!!”
Well said. It used to be there were winners and losers, that’s changing because the leftists don’t want any other leftists feelings hurt.
Well, like I said, if you are honored with the job of being a judge in this country, you have to be able to put your political/personal views and opinions aside when you are doing your job...Simple, right???
That is why I do not have a lot of faith in having only 4 guys, of varying degrees of originalist intent of interpretation of the Constitution...They work pretty good as a team and when they all sit in on the same case...They are fairly solid in that capacity...
But the other 5 are goofy’er that a bowl of fruit loops, and I do not trust any of them at all...They bring their political and personal views and opinions to the bench proudly every single day they are in session...
What is scary is we stand the chance to allow Obama to appoint 1, 2 maybe even 3 more AJ’s to this court...
And Romney will never apoint an originalist to the court...
So in the long-run, and in this context, we are basically screwed any way you look at it...
And for the overall thread, I believe Texas has been successfully relegated to a moderate and un-important state in the nomination process...Where we weer the conservative crown jewel in a general election cycle, we have mainly moderates to fringe republicans left to vye for our approval...They will probably not even spend a lot of time here to let us get to know them...But then again, I think we know them well enough anyway...
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.
