FReepmail me to subscribe to or unsubscribe from the SCOTUS ping list.
Posted on 04/22/2014 7:28:04 AM PDT by cripplecreek
The U.S. Supreme Court upheld Michigan's controversial ban on affirmative action in public college admissions in a divided opinion released Tuesday morning, preserving a status quo that's contributed to dwindling minority enrollment at the state's flagship colleges.
The high court's decision is a blow to the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor, which has come under fire for low minority enrollment.
Blacks comprise just 4.6 percent of undergraduates this year, compared to 8.9 percent in 1995 and 7 percent in 2006.
University of Michigan President Mary Sue Coleman and admissions director Ted Spencer have decried the affirmative action ban, saying outright that the school cannot achieve a fully diverse student body with it in place.
"It's impossible," Spencer said in a recent interview, "to achieve diversity on a regular basis if race cannot be used as one of many factors."
Fifty-eight percent of Michigan voters in 2006 passed Proposal 2, a ballot initiative that amended the state constitution and made it illegal for state entities to consider race in admissions and hiring. With the Supreme Court's ruling, the only way left to nullify Proposal 2 is to mount a long, expensive and uncertain campaign to overturn it.
(Excerpt) Read more at mlive.com ...
“The University of Michigan is saying ‘we think that the only thing that matters is how many in a certain skin color group graduate each year.’
It is actually worse than that. The University thinks that the only thing that matters is diversity within admissions. They actually create an entire subset of people that WILL fail, drop out and then never go to another college! They are creating an entire group of poeple that will never escape poverty.
Instead, if it were merit based, then the sub par students (majority and minority) might actually pick a school that can better meet their needs which would result in actually achieving the goal of receiving a degree. That would be truly life changing for the minority individuals.
But hey, once again the Demonrat party proves that their policy is not interested in helping the individuals that they pretend to care about. Instead, it is rhetoric over substance!
And the sheep will bleat their approval.
Thanks for the ping. HOORAY USSC!
For the SCOTUS ping list.
FINALLY! Reverse discrimination partially BANNED.
Soft bigotry of low expectations. Shame on Mary Sue.
Scalia just doesn’t get it. The Equal Protections Clause of the 14th Amendment is part of a “living” document, one that’s open to reinterpretation and shouldn’t be read literally.
In today’s world, equality doesn’t mean “equality.” Equality means “fairness.”. fairness sometimes (oftentimes, actually) requires inequality.
Why is that so hard for Neanderthals like Scalia and Conservatives to understand and accept???
I have a simple solution for the low minority admission “issue”: everyone who applies is assigned a random number between 1 and 10,000,000, and when the application period ends, the first few thousand people with the lowest assigned numbers are allowed to enroll.
This should meet all tests of fairness and if minorities happen to apply in outsized numbers, then tons of them will get enrolled!
Problem solved. After all, enrolling in college is not to actually obtain a useful education anymore, but to further “social justice” and turn out legions of brainwashed Marxists, all the while making sure the colleges obtain maximum money from Federal student loan money.
What is BAMN?
From FT:
“Justice Sonia Sotomayor, the court’s first Hispanic justice, delivered a strong dissent, which she read aloud in the hearing room. She was joined in her opinion by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
“To know the history of our nation is to understand its long and lamentable record of stymieing the right of racial minorities to participate in the political process,” she wrote. “
I guess I am on the left side of the bell curve today... I don’t understand what your point is
ok, thx.
What does it mean to be black? Are Asians a minority, can whites be? Is diversity just a physical appearance thing or is it based on apparent race or ideas? Colleges work hard to drive away conservative thought, so they don’t really want diversity. Finally, what is achievement? Is it just getting in to college, finishing freshman year or getting the degree? Studies show that most blacks do better at an all black college. Many kids do better at a same sex school. Is racial diversity worth it? Those are my points.
Why is diversity race-based?
The U.S. Supreme Court upheld Michigan's controversial ban on affirmative action in public college admissions in a divided opinion released Tuesday morning, preserving a status quo that's contributed to dwindling minority enrollment at the state's flagship colleges.
IIRC, the ban against racial preferences adapted into Michigan's state constitution by referendum [initially called Prop 2] covers all state transactions, and is not limited to state college admissions. Furthermore, the deception here is that the writer implies that the U of M is following the ban on affirmative action currently, when that is not the case.
The high court's decision is a blow to the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor, which has come under fire for low minority enrollment.
A blow to the U of M? Really? On the contrary, it should strengthen the University because on the whole, the students will be more qualified.
University of Michigan President Mary Sue Coleman and admissions director Ted Spencer have decried the affirmative action ban, saying outright that the school cannot achieve a fully diverse student body with it in place.
This is really deceptive. As for as is known, the U of M has NOT DROPPED affirmative action from their undergrad admissions process, now eleven years after the SCOTUS decision in Gratz and 7 years after Prop 2 went into effect as state law. They didn't like it, and they refused to live with it, even though it was the law of the state (and the law of the United States).
Good riddance, Mary Sue. And don't let the door hit you on the way out! Hopefully your successor will abide by the law, which you obviously failed to do.
The constitution is clear. SCOTUS said the states have the right to vote on the issue and upheld the voters. All those leftie terms you throw around are not meaningful and aren’t worth the time it takes to even read them. It is simple you do not end discrimination by discriminating. There are no more ‘all black’ colleges and even the same sex institution is dwindling to a few. Those that fit that category are PRIVATE institutions and do not fall under the category of a public university.
In addition, the Bakke decision made it clear that affirmative action was a no no
Thanks cc. Of course, when the Demwits running the place refuse to abide by that, or come up with a new name for exactly the same practice, it will all have to go back to court.
FReepmail me to subscribe to or unsubscribe from the SCOTUS ping list.
So Breyer left the (liberal) reservation, in the interest of not DESTROYING the lives of blacks that ultimately fail-out, and then, rightfully, blame “the system” for screwing them. In other words, the same blacks ‘accepted’ at Michigan could have gone to Wayne State and did JUST FINE.
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.