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

[ModernDayCato]

I always read Paul Johnson wherever I see his biline. He's terrific.

[freedomcrusader]

I remember reading awhile ago a conjecture that the whole Jayson Blair episode at the NYT would influence the outcome of these cases.

I've followed this thread from the beginning but do not recall anyone commenting on the matter. Anyway, it would appear as though the Jayson Blair mess had NO effect.

O'Connor was the swing vote to keep the law school admissions policy so she obviously wasn't influenced in the right direction, and the vote to trash the undergrad "point system" was 6-3. Unless someone wants to say that Jayson Blair changed it from a 5-4 to a 6-3 vote...

[Hostage]

Let's be clear. I am not in disagreement. The Great Depression was not a simple downturn in the economy but a reflection of the consequences of the industrial revolution. America went from an agricultural base to an industrial base, a new base untested and uncharted. The enormity of the great depression was marked as a glaring failure of American capitalism in the backdrop of rising European socialism.

The icons of capitalism, Carnegie, Morgan, Rockefeller, etc. were confronted with a class of hopeless displaced Americans, with no prospects. Safety nets were virtually nonexistant save the incredible Christian charities that saved untold numbers from starvation.

One can argue who or what is to blame but it is clear that it was an experience unparalleled, and rivaled only by the War between the States.

How we handle the down and out is how we measure the success of our national principles. We do not want the XYZ Corporation to own every radio outlet, every TV outlet, every internet ISP, every grocery mart, every auto manufacturing plant, every construction company. But a successful capitalist left unchecked can surely acquire total control.

The robber barons of yesterday bought out, starved or outlawed their competition, and yes, in the case of Carnegie, undercut the competition by reducing costs and fighting off unions.

During the Great Depression, millions of lives were left idle from factories that were closed down or severely cutback. To go from prosperity to starvation left an impression upon the public that capitalism and industrialization was not necessarily a good foundation for living, regardless of our Constitution. It spelled failure. There was for the first time a significant number of doubters. Looking back, sure it was easy to say "Well, John, if you had only held on to those wheat fields and not gone to take that job in Chicago, you'd still be able to feed your family".

Americans lost their independence when they left their farms. Once a family could provide for themselves by living off the land, by educating themselves, by understanding their property rights and the Constitution that gave them those rights. Once there were more than 80% of Americans with their own farmsteads, now less than 5%. The interdependence is extreme, the consumer is viewed as the foundation of the economy, and hence the foundation for living.

Against that backdrop, Leftists, Progressives, Government Unions have been successful in arguing that government is an investment of "essential" services for consumption, a regulator of large greedy corporations, a protector of clean air and water. And these so-called essential services and "investments" are backed and enforced by law, hence an industry dedicated to regulating your every move.

Sometimes it is helpful to imagine living in the 1930's. Hitler was coming to power, why? Because Stalin posed an enormous threat. Roosevelt was allowed to circumvent the Constitution, why? Because socialism was gaining popularity and capitalism was viewed as a failure.

America was brought out of the Great Depression (not just the economic effects but the spiritual effects) by the victories of the second world war. It made the sons and daughters of Americans who had lived and died during the Great Depression think with pride again of their country, that America was good, that it was a force of good in the world. The rebuilding of Europe and the corresponding pickup in the American economy made people forget about the sirens of socialism. America was back and it was proud. The Social Security Tax was 1%. The vestiges of Roosevelt's reign seemed insignificant and nonthreatening. It wasn't until the 1950's that Democrats realized that their power hinged on the socialistic tenets of the New Deal and that to regain and maintain power, they must grow the social programs, and control the interdependence. Until Reagan, they were enormously successful.

How we proceed and whether or not we are successful is anyone's guess. George W. Bush's faith based programs are a good start. But the key is to eliminate the welfare state and the enormity of the interdependence.

We need tax reform, tort reform and a strengthening of property rights. We need young people to buy land and work it; tomatos, grapes, wine, whatever. We need local control of education, funded by locals for locals with minimal interference from a national body save for a requirement that every student learn and study the U.S. Constitution, including the works of the Founding Fathers. We need compulsory military service of at least two years.

There are alot of needs. To return to a foundation for living independent and free, we must figure out how to reinstall that foundation and convince people that it is the best possible foundation for living.

[Fury]

Hey, Brian S!

From the Opinion of Justice Thomas:

"Justice Powell's opinion of Bakke and the Court's decision today rest on the fundamentally flawed proposition that racial discrimination can be contextualized so that a goal, such as classroom aesthetics, can be compelling in one context but not in another. This "we know it when we see it" approach to evaluating state interests is not capable of judicial application. Today, the Court insists on radically expanding the range of permissible uses of race to something as trivial (by comparison) as the assembling of a law school class. I can only presume that the majority's failure to justify its decision by reference to any principle arises from the absence of any such principle. See Part VI, infra."

[goldstategop]

Well, yes. But they have to avoid being completely blantant in how they push it forward. I'd characterize today's twin SCOTUS ruling as being tantamount to a kinder and gentler reverse Plessy V Ferguson.

[Fury]

and more from Justice Thomas:

"The silence in this is case is deafening to those of us who view higher education's purpose as imparting knowledge and skills to students, rather than a communal, rubberstamp, credentialing process. The Law School is not looking for those students who, despite a lower LSAT score or undergraduate grade point average, will succeed in the study of law. The Law School seeks only a facade - it is sufficient that the class looks right, even if it does not perform right."

[goldstategop]

Racism is OK if its "narrowly tailored." I would think the Ku Klux Klan would a kick out of that argument. Let's just discriminate with more finesse today.

[Fury]

Justice Scalia's comments are very succint and to the point as well. Again, I suggest to all they read...

[RJayneJ]

Thanks for the nomination! };^D )

[Luis Gonzalez]

"Until a government is instituted among men that defines those rights and the means to defend them objectively...there are NO rights."

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men..."

I'm looking for the part about God waiting for the U.S. government to come into being so that he could grant rights to all men.

Could you help me out please?

[July 4th]

Apparently, it calls for ending racial preferences within 25 years.

I was just talking with a lawyer and family friend who practices frequently before the Supreme Court. He said this "25 years" line is the most important in entire law school decision.

Affirmative action was put in place to 'correct a wrong' - whether you personally agree with that statement is not an issue. This is the court's own view. Therefore, there is an interest towards correcting that wrong. Before the decision today, we never had a timetable on when that wrong would be corrected. We know now. And 25 years from now, when someone's kid applies to the U of M and is denied admission in favor of someone with darker skin...that may very well be the end.

As a law student myself, I would like to have seen the practice tossed completely, but the Supreme Court is very rarely as bold as people would like them to be.

[Teacher317]

In essence, race can be a factor, along with legacies, sports, etc.

In stark comtrast with the Equal Protection clause. Legacies, etc. are fine, because they are not outlawed by the Constitution. Different treatment on the basis of race is, er, was forbidden.

[Teacher317]

Great lines. Thanks for posting them.

[Luis Gonzalez]

"You seem not to understand that "multiculturalism" (as opposed to people who come from different backgrounds) destroys the essential civilization that brought the benefits the new immigrants seek."

You have no clue what I do, or do not understand.

You haven't the foggiest idea of what drives immigrants today, in post-1970's America.

While your romantic take on why immigrants came to America makes for a great Hollywood script, it isn't necessarily the truth. The vast majority came here either seeking their fortune, or escape from persecution.

[Lady Eileen]

I always read Paul Johnson wherever I see his biline. He's terrific.

As I have read your book (almost 1,000 pages) will you now read mine? (less than 200 pages )? =). Regardless of your personal theistic view, I think you'll find Biblical Economics to agree with your economics view.

It's also very readable and thus particularly suitable to hand out to those Christians who are skeptical about sound economics (and might be hesistant to read a secular view) but would read a book that presents a biblical perspective.

[Teacher317]

I'm looking for the part about God waiting for the U.S. government to come into being so that He could grant rights to all men.
Could you help me out please?

Um, if you'll read it, it says that He created us with those rights. He didn't have to wait for anything. It was the human race that was waiting around for thousands of years for a government to be instituted among men where those rights were respected and defended. Once one was created, one hundred million people raced to it or died trying, and the majority of the planet's immigrants still hold America as their preferred destination. See it now?

[TLBSHOW]

LOL back at ya!

and no I don't need to hear what Rush says to see the truth. I think I did fine without him the first hour.

[Luis Gonzalez]

"Actually, I plugged the demographics of my county into the 'Find a Neighborhood' feature of realtor.com"

Can you point me to the specific page in realtor.com where it tells you what the percentage of white people living in a neighborhood is?

[Luis Gonzalez]

You are a teacher?

Did you bother reading what I was replying to?