Posted on 06/23/2016 10:21:04 AM PDT by Altura Ct.
The Supreme Court on Thursday rejected a challenge to a race-conscious admissions program at the University of Texas, Austin, handing supporters of affirmative action a major victory.
The vote was 4-3. Only seven justices participated in the decision. 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.
The case concerned the University of Texas’s idiosyncratic admissions program. Most applicants from within the state are admitted under a part of the program that guarantees admission to top students in every high school in the state. (This is often called the Top 10 Percent program, though the percentage cutoff can vary by year.)
“A university is in large part defined by those intangible ‘qualities which are incapable of objective measurement but which make for greatness,’” Justice Kennedy wrote, quoting from a landmark desegregation case. “Considerable deference is owed to a university in defining those intangible characteristics, like student body diversity, that are central to its identity and educational mission.”
In a lengthy and impassioned dissent from the bench, Justice Alito denounced the court’s affirmative action ruling, saying the university had not demonstrated the need for race-based admissions and saying the program benefitted advantaged students over impoverished ones.
“This is affirmative action gone berserk,” Justice Alito told his colleagues, adding that what they had done in the case was misguided and “is simply wrong.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
YUP.
The war against Whites, especially White males, accelerates.
How long will it be before there is a 'White Tax'?
Justice Kennedy joins with the left to shove racism-based outcomes down the throats of Americans.
Put it all together and boil it down and the supreme court is saying that it’s a benefit for students to go to a school where they will have stupid classmates.
It’seems also a code word for “lowest common denominator”.
The supremes just allowed unconstitutional actions to proceed, thus rendering themselves eligible for impeachment.
SCOTUS.
I would agree with this decision ... IF diversity were not solely determined by skin color or ethnicity (or sexual orientation).
For example if a student of any race or ethnicity or sexual orientation was admitted on the basis of achievements other than academic ones, then fine ... you don’t want a university full of people who are either intelligent or simply good at taking tests.
But that is not what this is about.
“would agree with this decision ... IF diversity were not solely determined by skin color or ethnicity (or sexual orientation).”
In Texas , admissions to A&M and Texas are based an merit.
If a student black, white, brown or purple is in the top 8% of their graduating class, they will gain admission to one of those schools.
No discrimination.
Admissions are based on merit.
This is part of the wealth, jobs and gun redistribution to terrorists program of Obama writ large.
Terrorists will hide behind being gay or islamic or black in order to get admission to sensitive jobs while we will get disarmed for ultimate slaughter at the hands of these maniacs
When reverse genocide, Hutus vs Tutsies, is social justice...
Disappointing continuation of legalized racial discrimination.
This decision is evil. It is evil to deny services, a place in school or a job to an individual based on criteria other then personal qualifications.
Now if SCOTUS will just say that the Constitution does not support diversity at the expense of other qualifications or competence.
“...race-conscious...” is NYT newspeak for racism that favors non-whites.
Prog-demons are so transparent.
All three branches are enemies of us and our Constitution.
Translation: Objective measurement is racist.
About a month later I was called and asked to come in and reinterview.
Same job, so I asked what happened. Was told that the employee didn't work out.
So, I asked if I got the job. NO! There had to be another interview.
My response---I told the woman supervisor that I wasn't going to be the token white guy so they could say they met the interview . criteria. And she could take the job and put it where the sun didn't shine. Only, not that nice.
The phone went, "click".
I am not 73 and have survived quite nicely.
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.