Posted on 01/24/2022 8:45:57 AM PST by Bruce Campbells Chin
BREAKING: The Supreme Court agrees to hear a pair of cases that challenge the race-based affirmative action policies for admission at Harvard University and the University of North Carolina. The cases likely will be argued next term.
I’m sure the same 3 will screw the Asians again.
But...but...the 25 years that Sandy Baby demanded ain’t up yet!
And of course will never be up as we all know.
Could also be the death knell of the Supremes. There is only one lawful conclusion. Any other conclusion requires, umbras, penumbras, and lots of sex lubricant. Of course, the lib section of that collection of awfulness has lots of stock.
Very good news.
You have a lot more faith in the court than I do.
3 communists, 4 flip-floppers and 2 conservatives do not make a conservative court.
SCOTUS heard pretty much this same issue as recently as 2016. It was 4-3 to uphold this kind of "diversity affirmative action" - only seven votes because Scalia had just died, and Kagan recused.
The Court has changed significantly since then, and there wouldn't be any reason for them to take this case unless they wanted to revisit the 2016 decision. My guess is either 5-4 or 6-3 (Roberts being the swing) to strike it down. The leftie legal pundits already are seeing the writing on the wall.
It is long overdue. Unconstitutional actions have been allowed for too long now. They must all stop and the perps thrown in prison.
There should not be any preferences in race, sex, religion, or political affiliation.
Still wondering why people thought going from “color blind” applications to quotas WASN’T going to end up here...
Affirmative Action is just the leftist response action to the Supreme Court decision that racial QUOTAs are unconstitutional.
The only thing leftists do now differently than back when they went for quotas is that they make no secret that it isn’t about quotas at all now because THERE IS SIMPLY NO MORE ROOM FOR WHITES, period.
LOL. Just so. We need the court to tell us the line betrween constitutional race discrimination, and unconstitutional race discrimination. Why? becuase this is a function they took on themselves, for the country.
-- And of course will never be up as we all know. --
There is nothing so bad that the law can't make it worse.
See COVID response, all done BY LAW.
This Court -- for all the bitching some do about it -- is tailor-made in terms of judicial philosophy to strike this down.
Race-based affirmative action policies will be deemed a tx.
a
It’s long overdue but they had to wait until they had enough dirt on the new members to ensure they’ll cave. You watch - Roberts will make sure Kavanaugh and the Notre Dame woman vote the right way! They’re what we used to call - never mind. - I don’t want to get suspended.
We've lost a generation of potentially great Doctors, denied entry into Med School based upon race.
“because this is a function they took on themselves”
Compelling State Interest I believe they called it back in ‘78 in Bakke.
It surprised me as a 20 something that the Supreme Court had the idea that they were empowered to conjure up things that were Goals of the Magnificent State.
Seems others were shocked as well. And we’ve been shocked ever since. But haven’t gotten out of it.
Sandy Babee comes from my neck of the woods. Used to work on a ranch a few doors down from the one she grew up on. Big spread, like they all are there....it’s desert, so you need a lotta dirt per cow. But it always surprised me that she has so much animus against the nation that gave her family that dirt: if it was still Mexico, it wouldn’t be hers. And she would not have had the cash to go to Stahn-ford.
But of course in her re-affirmation of anti-Caucasian Discrimination, she crapped on that nation. Personally, I’m waiting for her to cede the land to Los Indigeanos from South of Douglas.
I have a funny feeling that ain’t happening. And if they were to try to make a point of it, she would be the first to call the Caucasian troops to defend her dirt...which of course, she wont, being far too dainty for that.
Funny how she likes to have it both ways. Not sure it’s going to work out like that.
In 2016, the 4 justices who upheld racial preferences were Breyer, Sotomayor, Ginsberg, and Anthony Kennedy, who was the deciding vote. On the other side were Thomas, Alito, and Roberts. Now, it's fair to assume that Kagan would have sided with the majority as well, but that majority has since shrunk by 2. It's now just Sotomayor, Kagan, and Breyer left.
The Roberts vote from 2016 is huge, because he normally would be the prime suspect to side with the lefties. But he's already on record against it. And we've since added Kavanaugh and Barrett, both of whom are more conservative than either Kennedy or Roberts.
I think it's probably going to be 6-3 to strike it down, and again, I know the doom and gloom/cynical crowd are convinced we'll lose. But one this one...you guys are almost certainly wrong.
Except for commies. Commies need not apply. Payback is a...
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.