Posted on 06/23/2016 7:26:00 AM PDT by Alter Kaker
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Thursday rejected a challenge to a race-conscious admissions program at the University of Texas at Austin, handing supporters of affirmative action a major victory.
The vote was 4-3. Only seven justices participated in the decision, as Justice Elena Kagan had recused herself for prior work on the case as United States solicitor general and the late Justice Antonin Scalia’s seat remains vacant.
Justice Anthony M. Kennedy wrote the majority opinion, joined by Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen G. Breyer and Sonia Sotomayor. Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel A. Alito Jr, dissented.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
“A selfish game for the Democrat party, really.”
This is a victory for Democrats, but not a victory by Democrats.
This instead is a victory for and by Republicans.
Every Regent at the University of Texas was appointed by a Republican governor, and the majority opinion was penned by Anthony Kennedy who was appointed to the Court by a Republican.
Grades are arguably a measure of merit and anticipated success.
The Court takes the Law School at its word that it would like nothing better than to find a race-neutral admissions formula and will terminate its use of racial preferences as soon as practicable. The Court expects that 25 years from now, the use of racial preferences will no longer be necessary to further the interest approved today.
Gotta keep resetting that 25 year clock!!
Yes, it seems that Democrat ideas eventually come to be endorsed by Republicans, regardless of merit.
What it will be like after Hillary appoints the vacant seat of Antonin Scalia
Yet, it is still discrimination. Admissions are not a blind process. They can relax standards to admit a major donor’s child.
If you can score a triple-double in every game in high school, your grades don’t mean as much anymore.
I wonder why this wasn't a concern when obamacare decisions were decided.
One would think that 2028 would be the scheduled end of it. Did the opinion here presume to actually state it should be pushed out?
There shouldn’t be nepotism in a government run system. We can understand it in a truly private system.
Also of course there are sports scholarships and those have an alternative system of measuring merit.
Not a surprise.
Of course there shouldn’t. But that’s just the way it is.
I doubt it. I was surprised to read O'Connor's pronouncement back in 2003. Struck me as foolish and naive.
But that isn’t an excuse not to keep on pushing for race blind at government level, free will at other levels.
And also not to keep pushing for non-nepotism rules at anything that is at government level.
If it’s private, have a party. But we don’t pay taxes to Caesar to get Caesar’s nephews in.
And yet it might be the only politically acceptable move towards saying “not forever”
Democrats think blacks and other minorities are so stupid, that they need affirmative action.
Yeah they do. People pay a ton of money just to watch guys throw a football or basketball around. The university has a lower standards to get them in.
It’s just of the game.
The problem is that tokens don’t get tutoring so they flunk out quickly.
Black and Hispanic privilege upheld by supreme court.
They oughtn’t in principle, I mean, and we ought to militate against it, I mean.
It is almost unseemly for a government institution to even be in the sports biz. This acts as a kind of solvent to help efface the difference between government and general society, a difference that Thomas Paine went to great pains (pun intended) to emphasize.
But fortuitously, certain minorities do quite well in sports. They might not think well but they run well.
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.