Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Fisher v. U. Texas could have been avoided

Fisher v. U. Texas could have been avoided

Argument was heard today in the Supreme Court in Fisher v. University of Texas.

The issues, as summarized at ScotusBlog were:

This morning the Court heard oral arguments in what is likely to be one of the highest-profile cases of this Term: Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin, the challenge to the university’s use of race in its undergraduate admissions process. Affirmative action is hardly a new topic at the Court: just nine years ago, in a case called Grutter v. Bollinger, it held that the University of Michigan Law School could consider race as one factor in its admissions process as part of its efforts to create a diverse student body.

The petitioner in today’s case, Abigail Fisher, had asked the Court to rule that the university’s policy goes further than the Grutter decision allows, because – thanks to a program that automatically admits any Texas high school student who graduates in the top ten percent of her class – the university already had a diverse student body, without having to consider race. But if the university’s policy passes muster under Grutter, Fisher suggested in her briefs, the Court should consider overruling that decision altogether.

It didn’t have to be this way, and it all could have been avoided.

There was a solution.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

I have worked in schools with significant minority populations. We have had inter-racial marriages for some time now, and I have had “Black” and “Hispanic” students who were so pale they were that shade which indicates the absence of color, White.

We simply need to do away with Affirmative Action. We do need to help the poor, regardless of their color.

    LukeHandCool in reply to Milwaukee. | October 11, 2012 at 12:23 am

    It’s come to this. This sense of entitlement to color.

    White dude LukeHandCool was bragging one summer afternoon after a day at the beach about the swarthy slavic tan he’d acquired (with teutonic highlights), when his bratty, caramel-colored biracial daughter said,

    “Daddy … I’m sorry … but you’re pink.”

    It’s come to this.

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

Sorry, but i just sprayed my monitor with the coke i thought i was going to drink after laughing so hard I almost passed out.

We need a Top 10 list for when “checking the box” would really come in handy – ala Late Nite.

In high school in 1970, I remember the first black teacher at a 2000-student HS in VA (we had <50 black students), by chance became my homeroom teacher and friend. I asked him if he thought racism could be overcome.

"Sure – when we eventually have enough intermarriage so nobody is pure anything and nobody can tell what race you are."

    Liberal fools. If everyone is the same color, tribalism will then come into play, and people will align themselves by, say, which side of the street they live on. Remember the Hatfield-McCoy murderous feud? (Could anyone other than the Hatfields and the McCoys tell the difference between those white hillbillies wearing the exact same beards and clothing?)

    Welcome to human nature. As Dennis Prager said, “I love humans, but I hate humanity.”

I think so many people started checking Native American as a form of protest that they changed it to something else on a lot of forms. Hell, most of us are native Americans. We were born here weren’t we?

I am really not interested in the Supreme Court though. Roberts is likely to read “black” as “white” and turn the whole thing on its head like he did with Obamacare. He should never be allowed to live that down.

And let’s face it, there is no legitimate way we can start with the Constitution as our basis and end up with the law as it is today. So much of it is such a farce in root and branch that the law might as well be determined by dart throw or fuzzy dice.

A person who has an actual grievance can seek redress. No one should have a problem with that.

But any system which penalizes an innocent person because of some presumed potential grievance of another is just FUBAR.

AFFIRMATIVE ACTION is the lunatic-left d-cRAT socialist endorsed formed of DISCRIMINATION. IT IS WRONG and IT IS DESPICABLE.

Now, isn’t that the American Way: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal…” — with the addendum provided by the lunatic-left — “…except when PREFERENCE is given to those who always vote for d-cRAT socialists.”

Pre-OBOZO’s “Post-Racial” America: Affirmative Action = giving preference to blacks for PERCEIVED PAST INJUSTICES.
Post-OBOZO’s “Post Racial” America: Affirmative Action/”Diversity” = giving preference to blacks in ALL matters, period.

See how things have “improved” under “You Lie!” hussein?

INCORRECT STATEMENT: Obama: ‘My entire career has been a testimony to American exceptionalism’
CORRECT STATEMENT: Obama: ‘My entire career has been a testimony to affirmative-action special treatment’

BTW: If leftist, anti-America training school hAHrvAHrd hadn’t practiced AFFIRMATIVE ACTION SPECIAL TREATMENT – which let mediocre student OBOZO in and rejected BETTER ACADEMICALLY QUALIFIED CANDIDATES because they were not the PREFERRED COLOR to meet an arbitrary QUOTA, America’s WORST PRESIDENT would still be jimmy carter !!!!

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend