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

[FreedomPoster]

You should have taken them to court; we need a test case on this.

[Ganymede]

The striking down of a point system should be important. How else can colleges continue to evaluate and rate candidates without their point systems? As a result they will NOT be able to consider race as a factor IF they continue to use a point system.

Uh, hate to break this to you but most institutions of higher learning are using "race" as a factor, and will continute to do so. Michigan was just a little too brazen about it with its "point system."

[mhking]

This could mean white only or black only or red only (or male only, gender will be next) law schools will be legal.

Mind you, the breakouts on most historically black schools (at least as far as law/med schools is concerned) is far closer to 50/50 than the race warlords would care to admit...

[arasina]

In politics, getting your way 75% of the time, means your agenda is on the winning side most of the time and your opponent is on the losing side 75% of the time.

Unfortunately, x42 got 43 in '92. :-)

[rustbucket]

With preferences on the other hand, its more subjective and presumably every one's chances remain more or less equal.

If everyone's chances were more or less equal, then preference, however subtle and subjective, wouldn't be given to one race over another.

[XJarhead]

An arbitrary point system is a quota even if its not labeled as such because a certain group of people are automatically eligible regardless of any other factor. They just get in because they fill it.

Not quite. Under the U of M system, it was theoretically possible for not a single minority to get admitted. They still had to have enough points for the 20 extra points to get them to the threshold for admission. So in that sense, it's less pernicious than a pure quota system. And normally, I'd agree that the undergrad opinion would mean the death-knell for quotas of any kind. But honestly, with O'Connor being the swing vote, I wouldn't bet my house on it. Suppose it would have been only 3 points instead of 20. I'm not at all confident that O'Connor (at least) comes out the same.

With preferences on the other hand, its more subjective and presumably every one's chances remain more or less equal. At least that's how the SCOTUS presumably saw it.

I agree, though its interesting to note what "SCOTUS" actually thought. 3 justices thought that quotas are okay. 4 justices thought that neither quotas nor preferences are okay. And only two split the baby and thought that preferences are okay but quotas are not. And of those three groups of opinions, I think the one that is the controlling opinion is the worst from a legal perspective. It elevates form over substance, because a subjective prefences can be far more discriminatory than an objective one.

[PhiKapMom]

Well why don't you thank the people for voting for Perot who elected Bill Clinton who appointed Gingsburg and Bryer.

Why is it that Freepers tend not to blame the DemocRATs that appoint their very liberal judges while going after Republicans -- Souter should not have been appointed but he came with high recommendations and was from NH not the liberal States surrounding NH. If you remember right, President Bush also appointed and stood behind Clarence Thomas! Did you forget that fact?

Earl Warren was not a liberal when appointed and look what happened to him. If you want to blame anyone, blame the Clintonites/Perot fools that gave us Clinton and two very liberal judges!

[arasina]

Again, are you sure?

I'm wearing deodorant today, yes. Sadly, this keeps people from smelling my stink but it doesn't work the other way around.

[finnman69]

yes, and they are using similar sneaky point systems. Not any more if they want to avoid deep doo doo.

[justshe]

---

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.

---

Actual proof of your allegation?

Source? Link?

[aristeides]

It was reported on threads here on FR at the time (right before the briefs were submitted.) I believe there was a Novak column.

[Dog Gone]

What is your position on that?

On a personal level, I support the Texas law. As a legal issue, it's on thin ice.

[sweetliberty]

Thanks. That's one I can see the merits on both sides.

[Luis Gonzalez]

Is it me, or did SCOTUS just basically tell a STATE UNIVERSITY that the Federal government had no business meddling in their decision on who they will assist in enrolling, or how they reach that decision, as long as there is not an unconstitutional advantage given to minorities via the point system?

[yankeedog]

The Democrats and the Republicans are the two factions dividing a single Liberal Political Party.

[Howlin]

I'll have to read the actual decision to be able to discuss that, but that is what it appears to say.

The talking heads seem to think this is a big deal.

[Mo1]

They expressly refused to commit themselves on the issue.

Again .. where did they do this?

[CatoRenasci]

You are quite right that race has not been a significant factor in the ideals of the high culture of the West which forms the underpinning of the American experiment.

However, what you -- and many people -- do not acknowledge is the singular importance in the development of those ideals into what has become the American vision of English philosophy and the classical liberal tradition which is almost exclusively the product of the British Isles. With respect to all of the other cultures and languages that go into the American melting pot, lose the essentially Anglo-Saxon attachement to individual rights and liberty, the Anglo-Saxon nonconformists suspicion of state religion, and the commitment to empiricism and an essentially Whig intepretation of history, and you will destroy this country.

Continental philosophy - whether the Thomist synthesis, Cartesianism or the later German and French system-builders just don't do the same things, they are compatible with fascism and tyranny in a way English thought is not. Come ye from anywhere, be ye of any creed or color, but understand, for all our faults, we've got the basics right here -- don't mess with them.

[mhking]

Is it me

Nope, not just you - if I'm reading this right, that's EXACTLY what they're saying. And if so, it has much larger ramifications for down the road...

[aristeides]

In their amicus briefs. They did so in footnotes.