Split Decision: Supreme court upholds grad policy, strikes Undergrad

MSNBC Live | 06-23-03

[Brian S]

Supreme Court rules in favor of U. of Michigan Admissions Policy

[mhking]

Bush wimped out on this one, said one thing on TV and did another with his brief he sent the SC.

How? Please tell me - what did he have to do specifically and directly with this decision?

[PhiKapMom]

How did Bush wimp out on this one? The White House argued against the Michigan law! He didn't nominate those Supreme Court justices.

BTW, Rush is not always right!

[Chairman_December_19th_Society]

My take, FWIW:

Taken together, SCOTUS basically said it is alright to discriminate against whites, just don't do it overtly and, BTW, leave yourself cover by having available an alternative explanation (the race not being the only factor argument in the law school decision).

Jesse Jackson and his army of Rainbow Coalition corporate extortionists have got to be salivating right now.

Very sad.

[justshe]

Did you conveniently overlook this post The Solicitor General argued in opposition to both the law school and the undergrad admissions policies ?

[deport]

This doesn't have to do with Bush .. so stop your BS

---

Encourage the valueless pontificator to continue to post his thoughts, if any..... after all it allows all who will be visiting FR today to read his inane rants.....

MAY 2004, the SHOW begins supporting the Bush/Cheney reelection campaign

[Puppage]

Exactly!!

[PPHSFL]

Oh ye of little faith. So, we didn't get all of what we were looking for from the Court today. But we got something today that will begin improving America. What we must do now is prepare for the grueling Senate battles ahead on the new Supreme Court justices. The Democrats will try their best to shut down Bush's pick. We must stop them. If we don't, then today's partial victories and others will be overwhelmed by liberal justices who regard the Constitution as written in pencil to be crossed out and rewritten at will.

[Carolinamom]

Terry Pell on FOX says that the 5 states that have scrapped race as a criterion for admission are achieving diversity in race anyway. (I know that Texas takes top 10% of HS graduates....what are the other 4 states?)

[Reagan Man]

>>> ... Rush is not always right!

Agreed.

No one is always right.

[TLBSHOW]

are you sure justshe?

[justshe]

Perzactly!

[TruthShallSetYouFree]

"I expect the court to rule that the Texas anti-sodomy law is unconstitutional" What is your position on that?

Missionary.

[Mo1]

Who do you think told the Justice Department not to argue that racial diversity is not a compelling interest?

They didn't???

Please explain further

[deport]

Florida is another, I think with some higher percentage, maybe 20%

[Luis Gonzalez]

"Diversity is what is wiping out our culture and will lead to the destruction of this country."

I assume that since this discussion is revolving around racial diversity, that you are speaking about racial diversity wiping out our (western) culture, and aour country.

I fond your statement ill-conceived at best, and flat oput ignorant at worst.

There has never been a time, in the history of this nation, when it has not been a diverse nation.

There has been religious diversity because it was a a nation built by people seeking, among other things, religious freedom.

There has been cultural diversity because it was settled by people from many cultures, and a culture was forged from many.

There has even been diversity in the languages spoken, because there has never been a period of time when English has been the only language spoken here.

What you need to come to grips with is the realization that western culture was built on western ideals, not on the color of anyone's skin.

[arasina]

No. :-) But I still like Rush. Don't always agree with him like...

[Mo1]

MAY 2004, the SHOW begins supporting the Bush/Cheney reelection campaign

Yes, I am aware of the cut off date

That BS doesn't fly with me .. either you support him or you don't ... you don't pick a date

[aristeides]

Solicitor General Olson argued that the two policies of the university were unconstitutional because they were not narrowly tailored (and so unconstitutional even if racial diversity is a compelling interest). He did NOT argue (because he had been ordered not to) that racial diversity is not a compelling interest that can justify practising racial discrimination if it is narrowly tailored. If racial diversity is not a compelling interest, then racial discrimination, whether a quota or a preference, is unconstitutional whether it is narrowly tailored or not. The Supreme Court apparently has just ruled that racial diversity IS a compelling interest, that the law school preferences are narrowly tailored, and the undergraduate more blatant preferences are not narrowly tailored.

[Howlin]

MAY 2004, the SHOW begins supporting the Bush/Cheney reelection campaign

A man he considers a traitor, in bed with terrorists, a pro-gay guy, a socialist, anti-marriage, a UN man, a fake, just like Clinton, an A$$hole, a sham, trash, a betrayer of Israel, pro-drugs, among other things.

And yet he IS going to support him coming May 1st, 2004.

Telling.

[aristeides]

They didn't???

I read the briefs. They expressly refused to commit themselves on the issue.