Skip to comments.DOJ sends letter to Universities telling them to ignore SCOTUS ruling on using race in admissions…
Posted on 10/07/2013 12:47:52 PM PDT by blueyon
I was listening to Attorney Joe DiGenova this morning on WMAL and he pointed out how the DOJ had recently sent a letter to universities telling them they could ignore the June ruling by the Supreme Court on using race in admissions. The Supreme Court, in a nearly unanimous ruling, said that universities could use race in admissions but not as a dominant factor. But in this letter the DOJ is instructing universities to continue with the same racial preferences that the Supreme Court had just barred them from using:
WSJ Obama Administration regulators have made a specialty of ignoring Congressional intent, and even black-letter law. Now theyre showing the same disdain for the Supreme Court with advice to universities about interpreting racial preferences in the wake of Junes Fisher v. University of Texas ruling.
In a September 27 letter to university presidents, civil rights officials from the Departments of Justice and Education wrote that the Courts decision in Fisher means that universities can continue with their same racial-preference policies. According to the Administrations version of events, the ruling was merely a tweak on 2003′s Grutter v. Bollinger decision that racial preferences could be used to achieve diversity on campus.
That must be news to the Supreme Court, which in an 8-1 opinion by Justice Anthony Kennedy rebuked Texas precisely because it had failed to heed Grutter. That decision said schools could use race in admissions but not as a dominant factor.
(Excerpt) Read more at therightscoop.com ...
This is why seeking a constitutional remedy my be futile, or even foolish.
Post copy of letter ?
If the Government is right, then The Bell Curve is right.
“So in other words, this administration is convinced you minorities are so incompetent and unintelligent that you MUST rely on Government imposed discrimination.”
Absolutely; it is government-sanctioned genetic/gender inferiority. Somehow private citizens are expected to treat certain minorities and women as equals while the government itself forbids it.
In the long run, while the financial burden is felt by white men, the permanent damage is done to those who will never be able to interface with them on equal footing (due to government interference). I am justifiably suspicious of anyone who could “check a box”, and overly confident in anyone who can’t, because of these policies.
The Constitution is dead. The executive branch no longer recognizes any limits on its power as opposed to the other branches of government, nor any on its power over the people.
I would point out that the death of the Constitution came with the full participation of the media, who were among the first institutions protected by the Constitution. Now they are just the propaganda arm of the communist government of the United States.
The list, Ping
Let me know if you would like to be on or off the ping list
Does anyone really think this administration gives a damn for anything beside it’s own blood drinking?
Andrew Jackson blew off SCOTUS and got away with it.
Marbury v. Madison did not come with any sort of enforcement mechanism.
Copy of letter: http://www.justice.gov/crt/about/edu/documents/fishercover.pdf
Like we expected anything different from these a$$hats?
That, and Weimaring the economy have always been his feculent dream!
When we get the Justice Department back... they had better get ready to administer some justice!
Sponsoring FReepers are contributing
$10 Each time a New Monthly Donor signs up!
Get more bang for your FR buck!
Click Here To Sign Up Now!
Looks like Servant of the Cross beat you by nearly half a minute re Obamacase. Maybe next time.
There is no law. It’s just a joke. It’s ruling by imperial decree. This is dictatorship.
This item alone (and trust me I know there are many more) is grounds for impeachment and removal from office.
This reminds me of President Andy Jackson’s response to a Supreme court decision “let them enforce it.” I don’t remember the context though it could have been about the legality of a national bank that he opposed
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.