U.S. top court upholds Michigan ban on college affirmative action

Comments (41)
gcf1965 wrote:

Hey, how can they strike down special rights and privilege, don’t they know this is how the DNC buys their voting constituents?

Apr 22, 2014 11:27am EDT  --  Report as abuse
4825 wrote:

Guess the liberal progressives will be calling the majority court a bunch of racist and bigots now. This was absolutely the correct decision for this country. We are all equal and should be treated equal, no special privilege for any group.

Apr 22, 2014 12:05pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
TheNewWorld wrote:

Maybe there is hope for this country after all. Giving preference to minorities based on their race is racist. Giving prefernece to majorities based on their race is racist. Not asking what race you are on your application is the best way to end racism, not adding quotas that grants admission based on race.

Apr 22, 2014 12:18pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
AlkalineState wrote:

Affirmative action was causing an artificially high number of Caucasians to be accepted to American colleges. The free market number settles at more like 20% white, 60% Asian, 20% other (in the colleges which have already dropped race as a factor.

Probably for the best.

Apr 22, 2014 12:20pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Mikon wrote:

Supreme Court UPHOLDS Michigan BAN on college affirmative action [HOORAY!!!!]

The dissenting votes came from two of the liberal members of the court, Justice Sonia Sotomayor and Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. [OF COURSE!!! They must appear to protect the Democratic voting base.]

Sotomayor wrote that the decision was a blow to “historically marginalized groups, which rely on the federal courts to protect their constitutional rights.” [Errrr... their "rights" to be granted PREFERENCE at the expense of others??? That premise is in direct CONFLICT with the "all men are created EQUAL" set by the Constitution.]

“The court had undermined its own precedents, which state that the majority cannot suppress minorities’ RIGHT to participate in the political process, Sotomayor added.” [Just WHAT "right to participate" is being suppressed? You mean minorities will actually have to COMPETE on a LEVEL playing field???]

Apr 22, 2014 12:25pm EDT  --  Report as abuse

Got to love the hateful righties cheering this decision, the funny thing is I bet they do not even know the intricacies of the decision, and that it was not a confirmation nor repudiation of the other Affirmative Action initiatives.

And again what is with this ‘vote buying’ BS again? Is not that the job of EVERY politician, to do what one thinks is right for ones constiuents? Is not Paul Ryan ‘Vote buying’ the right wing/corporate/rich vote with his draconian and unrealistic budget proposals? You rightie/Obama haters are sure a twisted/uninformed bunch. For example those that openly threaten federal agents with firearms are now considered ‘patriots’ by you all when they are engaging in borderline seditious behavior, just so a rancher does not have to pay the same fees for using public land that every other rancher has paid for 100′s of years.

Apr 22, 2014 12:46pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Zeken wrote:

Affirmative action = denial of equal protection to white men.

No matter how you spin it, that’s what it is.

Funny how those evil white guys, who supposedly run things, have allowed massive legally-mandated discrimination against themselves for all these decades. Not to mention other goodies like massive non-white immigration. Strange.

Those nasty racists must have some master plan up their sleeves. Can’t wait to find out what it is.

Apr 22, 2014 1:02pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Dr_Steve wrote:

Let’s set the record straight. “All men are created equal” is NOT set out in the U.S. Constitution. It is in the first sentence of the second paragraph of the DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE.

Apr 22, 2014 1:09pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
FRPSR wrote:

Calling people pinheads , directly accusing a political entity of buying constituencies as opposed to representing the constitutionally protected interests of voters , is this confusion as an identifying principle ?
If it isn’t it should be , by golly .
Working people whose right to representation attacked by the idea that on the one hand supports governmental action , while resisting that very same action when it presupposes an oppositional thought , word , or deed that by that very nature is contrarily considered unconstitutional .
Philosophy rooted in the protestant perception of “Mary , Mary quite contrary” ?
Objecting to the lack of fecundity , thus Catholic identity of implied faithlessness of the “French” queen rather than the king consort with the queens ladies ? Or the application of a faithless interpretation of the pursuit in harassment of Catholics through either objections to ostracizing anybody including catholics , or an egalitarian approach defeating the wishes of both Henry and Edward in their pursuit of cutting out the greedy middle in matters generating ecclesiastical cash .
For an intrepid calumny how better to phrase an objection than when having won the point , pursue the entire issue as operational approach . Dismissing the idea that it is a fine and noble thing for Europeans and the cousins across the pond , acting in Noblesse oblige , while busily dispossessing a two thousand year culture while enjoying the fruits the convenience of bullying a pastoral culture brings , and the relief from guilt for the oppression Jews suffered at the hands of a holocaust . An infamy not quite as popularised as being shared with Gypsies or Romany , useless people , or homosexuals , dwarves , mentally ill and the like , but then suffering an obtuse contrarian reaction that three hundred years of people being held as animals have no guilt sponsoring corollaries . Nice and neat !
The idea of learning to read and write being a capital offense that was applied historically , plays no part in the discussion of whether or not to lend a corrective support to these same oppressed people when considering aiding their acquisition of a furthering of these same skills today . Perhaps if there had been a more familiar catalogue of impulses and memories the hesitation to right a historical wrong would have met the same largesse as the four billion a year since the sixties which has insulated the difficulties the nurtured , and cosseted Israelies are forced to endure and recognise when they are stealing Palestinian land , murdering Palestinians shepards and orchardists , so that when joking about how they broke Rachel Cory’s back running an earth mover back and forth over her , they will feel better about being the responsible for the daily US Taxpayer supported horror .

Is that what you mean by disguising your opinion behind the twisted reasoning of Heads I win , Tails you lose ?

Apr 22, 2014 1:17pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
AlkalineState wrote:

It’s messy. Affirmative action was lame, but probably necessary at some point in the past. America is one of the only rich countries to have brought their slaves home, and make slavery an integral part of the homeland. The European countries kept their slaves out in the colonies, so when rebellion arose, they could just write off the colony and move on (think France in Haiti, Belgium in the Congo, etc). But the early american model of schitting where you eat, has clearly caused problems here. Jefferson was right that it would likely doom the country. Ultimately, it did. Too many people here who never wanted to be here, and too poor now to go anywhere else. Doomed was right.

Apr 22, 2014 1:21pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Dr_Steve wrote:

@FRPSR: Tell us how you really feel.

Apr 22, 2014 1:44pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
FredMertz90 wrote:

Now wait a minute, affirmative action advantages in spite of a consistent display of lack of intellect, ability and/or willingness to work instead of having everything fed to minorities on a silver spoon. I am sure smart blacks, and woman will still get in over less qualified applicants.

Apr 22, 2014 1:47pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Eideard wrote:

The BBC gets American politics a bit more realistically than our apologists for bigotry:

MICHIGAN UNIVERSITY RACE BAN UPHELD

Apr 22, 2014 1:59pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
SteveHinLFP wrote:

Hey 4825: “We are all equal and should be treated equal, no special privilege for any group.” That means that gays have as much right to marry as non-gays and women should be paid equally to men for the same work, non-whites have every right that whites have EQUALLY and without prejudice right? Whites can’t sit at the front of the bus while others have to sit in back and white males can’t be shown preference in jobs and pay and access to the best neighborhoods right? Until these inbred and ingrained inequalities in our society are addressed, how can we ensure a level playing field without some mechanism to prevent the profiling and marginalization of those who AREN’T in the “Straight White Male” dominant group? Special rights? I think not, rather “Specific call out to ensure equal rights”

Apr 22, 2014 2:07pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Dr_Steve wrote:

What? No more races?

Apr 22, 2014 2:08pm EDT  --  Report as abuse

How is AA considered Equality? Diversity is White Genocide.

Apr 22, 2014 2:22pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Mikon wrote:

Dr. Steve… Thanks for the correction of my post about “All men are created equal.” Nevertheless, that is a premise on which a great deal of America is built and Americans subscribe to it.

Actually all men are NOT equal by any stretch of the imagination, but they ARE equal in the eyes of the law.

Apr 22, 2014 2:40pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Yashmak wrote:

“Affirmative action programs, first advocated in the 1960s to combat discrimination against racial minorities, have faced a backlash from conservatives in recent decades.”

Not just from conservatives. Not even close. For instance, one of the states which bans it, California, is one of the most liberal in the union. Realistically, anyone who is interested in true equality should be opposed to affirmative action.

Apr 22, 2014 3:00pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Crash866 wrote:

FRPSR
Whatever the ruling is done and that’s your government at work. If it went they way you wanted or didn’t want….Enjoy!!

Apr 22, 2014 3:08pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
ARJTurgot2 wrote:

Don’t look now, but there are actually parts of the Democrat party that are celebrating this decision. AA’s value as a wedge issue is gone, in fact is negative, and if you truly want to make income inequality an issue you have to include poor whites. In addition, while they can win a national election, they are increasingly losing the countryside, because it turns out Bubba gets to vote too.

Tonight Hillary will kick off her shoes and enjoy a long cold one, joyful at not having to face a divisive issue.

Apr 22, 2014 3:26pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
gcf1965 wrote:

So, the court is actually upholding actual eqaulity and not the false liberal ideology of equality?

Apr 22, 2014 3:27pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
NBE wrote:

Good. Affirmative action was an ill-advised remedy for a legitimate issue, and it has not only failed but also worsened race relations in this country. The hostilities now, the resentments now are extreme; half a century ago, there were tensions, but nothing like the present climate. Hope other states ban affirmative action too; it is a nice-sounding name but it does not affirm anything warranting affirmation, and has made for a lot of trouble and ill will. My children and grand-c are all public school grads/students . . . and did not seek “affirmative” treatment even though, as they are of mixed-race, it was an option. An option not taken, glad to say.

Apr 22, 2014 3:41pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
willich6 wrote:

The decision was very clear and; University admission can take into account many factors, including socio-economic, in deciding who gets admitted. But race is not one of them – there can be No Special Preference for one race over another – that is the definition of descrimination.. This vote was a vote for the equality of all Americans – you ‘earn’ your way into college…

Apr 22, 2014 3:56pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
jabberwolf wrote:

Dont call it “affirmative action”. Call it what it is: RACISM.
You get a different set of entrance standards and tuition costs based on the color and tone of your skin. Thats racism – pur and simple.

Apr 22, 2014 4:08pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
YRaj wrote:

As a liberal, I think it is time for Affirmative Action to be ended. To move forward, we have to move forward under equal opportunities. Affirmative Action was necessary and has served its purpose. It was supposed to be temporary to repair the oppression that hurt the advancement of blacks. Yes, there is still rampant racism. However, race should not be part of the assessment when applying for entry to college. If it were, then that would be racist.

Apr 22, 2014 4:25pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
AmericanBison wrote:

Earn your own way regardless of your skin color, creed, or breed.

Apr 22, 2014 4:31pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
nose2066 wrote:

This is yesterday’s war.

Today, discrimination is based on how much money you have. Money buys political influence. Money buys you a home in a neighborhood with other rich people. Money buys your children an education at exclusive schools.

Apr 22, 2014 4:42pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
xxtimliddle wrote:

46% of whites voted for the first black man for POTUS with no business experience…. 2% of blacks voted in 2012 for a very successful white businessman. With this clear evidence, if the blacks were in the majority in this country the SCOTUS would obviously have grounds to uphold Affirmative Action. I for one could argue the case that maybe there should be an IQ test to vote instead.

Apr 22, 2014 4:42pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
kbill wrote:

Good. A small victory for equality, but a victory nonetheless. We need to get rid of the entire Johnson era affirmative action debacle including Executive Order 11246.

Equality cannot be gained or sustained by re-writing history with costly, and unworkable quotas. Affirmative Action, on balance, has failed to meet any of the stated goals which were used to justify its creation.

Apr 22, 2014 8:32pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
kevin2ia wrote:

So the 6th US Circuit gets it thrown back in their face, it’s a start. Does any really even read the rationale behind this?

Civil rights groups had argued that the 2006 Michigan constitutional amendment that passed as a ballot initiative had imposed burdens on racial minorities in violation of the U.S. Constitution’s guarantee of equal protection.

What a load of crapola. And to think I believed the liberals owned the SCOTUS; at least on this one, not.

Apr 22, 2014 9:46pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
PortlandME wrote:

It is so funny to read the comments from the conservatives. A few facts:

1) The Court affirmed the citizens of the state of MI their constitutional rights to use a ballot initiative to vote on a state policy issue. The Court did not rule on the merits (pro/con)on the issue of Affirmative Action. Nor did the Court agree/disagree with the MI Affirmative Action policy.

2) Public and private studies have demonstrated that White women have been the clear winners/benefactors in the use of Affirmative Action programs and policies.

3) The Court in past decisions, like in the case Bakke v. The University of California Davis Medical School, rule that race and ethnicity can be used as apart of college admission. Race and ethnicity, however, cannot be used as the determinant factor in college admission.

4) US demographic shift over the next five to ten years mean people of color will make up a significant percent of the US workforce and college admission candidates…Thus, Affirmative Action programs will be less important in this century and beyond.

Like I said, it is funny to read the comments from conservatives…because they don’t have a clue about they are talking about.

Apr 23, 2014 2:01am EDT  --  Report as abuse
PortlandME wrote:

It is so funny to read the comments from the conservatives. A few facts:

1) The Court affirmed the citizens of the state of MI their constitutional rights to use a ballot initiative to vote on a state policy issue. The Court did not rule on the merits (pro/con)on the issue of Affirmative Action. Nor did the Court agree/disagree with the MI Affirmative Action policy.

2) Public and private studies have demonstrated that White women have been the clear winners/benefactors in the use of Affirmative Action programs and policies.

3) The Court in past decisions, like in the case Bakke v. The University of California Davis Medical School, rule that race and ethnicity can be used as apart of college admission. Race and ethnicity, however, cannot be used as the determinant factor in college admission.

4) US demographic shift over the next five to ten years mean people of color will make up a significant percent of the US workforce and college admission candidates…Thus, Affirmative Action programs will be less important in this century and beyond.

Like I said, it is funny to read the comments from conservatives…because they don’t have a clue about they are talking about.

Apr 23, 2014 2:01am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Zeken wrote:

Sure, white women have benefited from AA. “Women and minorities,” the great dispossessed masses. “Women and minorities” is all we hear. “Women and minorities.”

Well, it’s white men who’ve been screwed by AA, even though the institutions in question, not to mention most of the modern world, were created by white men.

Also, an increasing non-white demographic will not mean the end of affirmative action.

The (misguided) generosity represented by AA is almost exclusively a white thing. Truth be told, whites are the least “racist” folks on the planet. When non-whites take power, identity politics take precedence. Just look at South Africa under black rule. Affirmative action, for blacks naturally, ad infinitum.

It is funny to read comments from liberals, because they always manage to sound like prissy, snarky college chicks. Even the “men,” LOL.

Apr 23, 2014 9:11am EDT  --  Report as abuse

NICE! LOVE IT! Minorities are OK with racism of course when it’s in their favor.

Apr 23, 2014 9:20am EDT  --  Report as abuse

Just think in the distant future, races won’t matter because WE’LL ALL LOOK THE SAME! The Scifi writers already write about it: we’ll all have light brown skin, curly brown hair, brown eyes, flat nose bridge, Asian eyes.

Apr 23, 2014 9:24am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Zeken wrote:

Yeah, and in that glorious future, we’ll have an average IQ of about 90.

Can “slow” folks maintain, let alone create, civilization? I don’t think so.

Apr 23, 2014 9:42am EDT  --  Report as abuse
branchltd wrote:

The idea that equality can be achieved through creating inequality is nonsense on the face of it. I doubt Martin Luther King would have thought it a good idea, had he survived.

Apr 23, 2014 10:42am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Zeken wrote:

Dunno about you, but MLK, a plagiarist with, shall we say, some other personal failings, is not my gold standard of wisdom.

Apr 23, 2014 11:15am EDT  --  Report as abuse
unionwv wrote:

It’s disappointing to see “newspeak” try and put a nice face on ugliness.

In this instance, calling what used to be called “racism” or “racial discrimination”, AFFIRMATIVE ACTION.

Apr 23, 2014 2:36pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Torbull wrote:

I guess it’s easy to say there should be no special privilege for any race and be against affirmative action if you start out ahead of others. Yeah I know “no one gave you anything”, “you’ve earn everything you have”, “I never owned a slave”, “black people should get over it and stop using the past as an excuse”. That is easy to say being the majority race in this country. Try looking at it from an African American’s point of view and you will see that is not the reality of the situation. Like it or not just 5 generations or 150 years ago blacks were still considered property. 2 generations or 50 years ago lynching’s and legal racism against black prevailed the land. So when I read “We are all equal and should be treated equal, no special privilege for any group.” I just say to myself, you started a 5 mile race at mile 4 and we start at mile 1 with a bolder chained to our neck (institutional racism, poverty, ignorance of self etc…). How long will it take for us to get ourselves together? I don’t know the answer to that. But one day we will, you can rest assure of that. This is the reason Historically Black Colleges and Universities exist.

Apr 23, 2014 3:36pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
GuestOoo wrote:

Well…..No more Affirmative Action based on race. All college admissions based on merit!!

So, there are 1.3 billion Chinese and 1.2 billion Indians who are considered Asians. If the colleges go by merit and not by race, this is okay for admissions, right? Are you sure? Are you very very sure????

You are ready to have 100% super-intelligent Asians in USA universities? Based on merit alone, race-blind which results in one super-intelligent race in USA universities – Asians based on merit. Forget diversity! You get what you asked for!

Calling all ASIANS!!! Go, go go!!! Fill up these USA universities before they change their minds. Game on!

Apr 24, 2014 3:51pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.