HomePoliticsAt the Supreme Court, affirmative action had a very rough day

At the Supreme Court, affirmative action had a very rough day

Published on

Affirmative Action is responsible for persecuting people on the basis of their gender, skin color, and religious beliefs, and it is finally being scrutinized at the highest levels of our government. Furthermore, in the era of’self-identification,’ there is no real justification for affirmative action.

Monday, the Supreme Court of the United States heard five hours of arguments about the future of “affirmative action” in college admissions. At the conclusion of the marathon session, it appeared that either affirmative action is dead, or that it will be “pining for the fjords” by June 2023, when this decision is issued.

“At issue are two cases where universities use racial preferences to manage the melanin level of their student body (Supreme Court Adds Two New Education Affirmative Action Cases to its Docket and the Left Cries ‘Armageddon’). The University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill is a state university that uses race in its admission process. Students for Fair Admissions, SFFA, sued in 2014 and lost the case before an Obama judge who ruled that UNC only used the tip used race minimally and had damned good reasons for doing so. Harvard is a private university that also uses race to manage who gets in. The issue, in this case, is that Harvard had a policy of actively discriminating against Asian applicants (Asian students sue Harvard for discrimination),” Red State reported, adding:

Today with regards to the Harvard SCOTUS case:

A student of African descent in the 40th percentile of Harvard’s academic index will outperform a student of Asian descent in the 90th percentile.

“That’s INSANE,” John Hasson reported.

The First Circuit ruled in favor of Harvard on appeal from the outcome of the trial. SFFA circumvented the Fourth Circuit by appealing straight to the Supreme Court in the UNC case.

When the Supreme Court accepted and consolidated the two cases, the arguments were phrased as follows:

(1) Whether the Supreme Court should overrule Grutter v. Bollinger and hold that institutions of higher education cannot use race as a factor in admissions;

(2) Whether a university can reject a race-neutral alternative because it would change the composition of the student body, without proving that the alternative would cause a dramatic sacrifice in academic quality or the educational benefits of overall student-body diversity, and

(3) whether Harvard College is violating Title VI of the Civil Rights Act by penalizing Asian American applicants, engaging in racial balancing, overemphasizing race and rejecting workable race-neutral alternatives.

More on this story via The Republic Brief:

Patrick Strawbridge, representing Students for Fair Admissions, said allowing the use of race in higher education was an outlier among the court’s decisions that should be rejected. CONTINUE READING…

Latest articles

New Clues into Las Vegas Shooter Revealed After FBI Releases Docs Years After Massacre

The FBI has released new records that reveal fresh information on the Las Vegas...

Trans Terrorist Group Plans “Trans Day of Vengeance” at SCOTUS And Calls For Death Against Christian Babies

On April 1st, a domestic terrorist organization led by trans individuals is planned a...

Democrats Respond to Trump’s Indictment, Quickly Humiliate Themselves

Democrat politicians were ready to chime in on Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg's phony...

BREAKING LEAK: Trump Hit with 34 Counts Related To Business Fraud

An extraordinary act of lawfare that occurred on Thursday night demonstrates that the American...

More like this