10/10/12 Oral Argument in Affirmative Action Case Fisher v. University Of TX (audio & transcript)

Oyez.com ^ | 10/12/12 | Supreme Court of the United States (via Oyez.com)

[BCrago66]

Fisher filed suit against the university and other related defendants, claiming that the University of Texas' use of race as a consideration in admission decisions was in violation of the equal protection cause of the Fourteenth Amendment and a violation of42 U.S.C. Section 1983. The university argued that its use of race was a narrowly tailored means of pursuing greater diversity. The district court decided in favor of the University of Texas, and the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit affirmed the district court's decision. Fisher appealed the appellate court's decision.

...

Question

Does the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment permit the consideration of race in undergraduate admissions decisions?

[BCrago66]

At the link, Oyez.com has a pretty cool app (under the heading "Argument") that simultaneously runs the audio & transcript of the oral argument. Please there's a separate link to the complete transcript.

[Enterprise]

Your honor, I rise in support of those females and minorities who wish to argue that they should have special considerations because they are inferior. With inferior people, Big Bird could not exist. Nay, and neither could Snookie!

Rise inferior people, be proud of your inferiorness, and fight the good fight. Do not go soberly into that good night!

[Ancesthntr]

As a human being, I have never understood the concept of utilizing discrimination against Group A - none of whom were guilty of any act of discrimination against anyone else - in order to benefit the members of Group B, who directly suffered no discrimination.

As an attorney, I cannot fathom how the discrimination mentioned above (which is entirely race- or gender-based, by the way) is somehow rendered Constitutionally permissible in order to erase some type of mythical collective guilt. Where in the Constitution is there even the implication that discrimination is permissible on racial grounds (except the 3/5 census clause, which hasn’t been used since the 1860 census)? Where is the concept of “collective guilt” in either the Common Law or the Constitution?

As for my kids (now of school age), their ancestors were in Eastern Europe and Russia being oppressed by the Czar of All the Russias while slavery and its immediate aftermath were being perpetrated - being oppressed on religious grounds (we’re Jewish). Neither was born before 2001, a date by which all hint of permissible discrimination had long since been removed from the laws of this nation (except, of course for these absurd laws enshrining one kind of discrimination to counter another). Oh, by the way, I don’t want any artificial advantage given to my kids - to want such would be the height of hypocrisy.

It is way past time to ditch this crap. Our laws MUST treat everyone equally, regardless of race, gender, etc. To do otherwise is as stupid as trying to treat an addiction to Jack Daniels with vodka, and will be just as effective. This stupidity and injustice only encourages contempt for the law.

[Tamzee]

Thank you! I listened to the almost 1.5 hours of arguments and it was fascinating. Alito, Roberts and Scalia were brilliant.

And regarding the commentary from Sotomayer and Ginsburg, America CANNOT afford any more left-wing Supremes! The thought of them entirely dominating all future cases is terrifying :-(