From Bad to Diverse - The Supreme Court debates whether the 14th Amendment means what it says

WSJ ^ | April 4, 2003 | PETE DU PONT

[Tailgunner Joe]

Is racial discrimination in the selection of applicants to attend colleges and law schools acceptable--and constitutional--if its purpose is to achieve diversity in the student body?

That was the question argued before the Supreme Court Tuesday. The University of Michigan says yes, the social goal of diversity is paramount. The qualified students rejected because of their race say no, such procedures violate their rights under the 14th Amendment, which guarantees "equal protection of the laws," and Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which makes discrimination "on the ground of race, color, or national origin" illegal for any institution receiving federal funds.

[mylife]

Equal means Equal...What is wrong with these Lefties??

[Calpernia]

So I wonder if the Black Congressional Caucus is unconstitutional ;)

[Arkinsaw]

To which Justice Antonin Scalia replied: "I don't know any other area where we . . . decide the case by saying, well, there are very few people being treated unconstitutionally."

The efficient razorblade tongue of Scalia slices another lawyer.

[Tailgunner Joe]

Racism in Congress: The Black Caucus

[rebel85]

bump

[yooper]

"On a 150-point admissions scale, an applicant gets points for various achievements: three points for an outstanding essay, 12 points for a perfect SAT score, 80 points for a 4.0 grade-point average--and 20 points for being black, Hispanic or American Indian. White or Asian students with lower than a 950 SAT score are automatically rejected; but if you are black, Hispanic or Indian the rejection score is less than 850."

Well, I admittedly learned math in a public school, but this certainly appears mathematically to be racism.

Maureen Mahoney, arguing the law school's case, said that of the "2,500 students who are rejected each year, probably only 80 of them . . . would have gotten an offer of admission from Michigan under a race-blind system."

So (again using math), there are 78 other potential plaintiffs?

Read it for yourselves, folks. The numbers clearly prove that U of M is wrong. They are practicing racism. It's a hard pill for liberals to swallow, but it's undeniable, at least to those of us who understand math and statistics.

[sausageseller]

The arguements were on CSPAN this afternoon. Ruth Buzzy seem very confused!

[longtermmemmory]

The best example of a meritocracy selection system was for an orchestra. The candidate sits behind a screen and the judging panel. The panel is opaque but acustically transparent. The pannel has no idea who is playing or any of the persons characteristics.

There were complaints that diversity was not part of the orchestra. They simply showed how they select candidates and advised the complaining group to just send candidates to be part of the system.

Universities are not about education, they are about indoctrination. (especially law schools. You should hear the crap they say about the cold war and the second ammendment.)

[sausageseller]

seem=seemed

She made me confused trying to figure her question out.

[Calpernia]

So technically, America is socialist?

[Tailgunner Joe]

They prefer the term "progressive."

[broadsword]

All animals are equal but some animals are more equal then others.

[MindBender26]

How many points is working your way through undergraduate school worth?

How many point us prior active duty military service in combat worth?


How many points is extensive volunteer service reading the the blind, cleaning up empty lots or taking care of stray animals worth?

How many points are a Bronze Star worth? A Silver Star? A MOH?

How many points is an alcoholic parent worth?

How many points is dyslexia worth?

How many points is extreme ugliness worth?

How many points is homosexuality worth?


And when did "diversity" replace excellent as a goal?

[PistolPaknMama]

the social goal of diversity is paramount.

i.e., government inflicted racial profiling..... yawn.

[meyer]

It means exactly what it says - equal protection under the law. Not special protection for "certain" groups.

[Atchafalaya]

You mean the ones wit de pointy toofesses, yo!

[judgeandjury]

If the University of Michigan really wants a "diverse" student population on their campus, why not seek diverseness in other ways besides just race. You can also have diversity based on nationality, ethnicity, religion, age, gender, height, weight, hair color, eye color, physical attractiveness/unattractiveness, political affiliation, etc.

[Teacher317]

"the University of Michigan admissions program has created a separate path and a separate door for preferred minorities. . . . If they meet basic qualifications, their path is always clear and their door is always open. . . . Nonpreferred groups face rigorous competition to get through the other door."

Nonpreferred groupS? Plural?? There's only one group that does not get special treatment. That group comprises less than 35% of the population. By being singled out as the only group that does not get the "special" treatments, it obviously gets poorer treatment than any other group. We used to call that sort of unequal treatment "unConstitutional discrimination" (and plainly evil). Today, we call it "progress", because we've finally found the target group that apparently will never fight back: straight white non-handicapped male legal citizens.

[Fraulein]

Indeed, the university's lawyer, when pressed to identify a single minimally qualified minority member who got the 20-point racial bonus and was rejected for admission, admitted, "I can't give you one."