User Tag List

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 18

Thread: The most diverse Supreme Court ever confronts affirmative action

  1. #1
    Original Ranter
    Points: 856,676, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 99.9%
    Achievements:
    SocialCreated Album picturesOverdrive50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Peter1469's Avatar Advisor
    Karma
    496108
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    NOVA
    Posts
    241,090
    Points
    856,676
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    152,933
    Thanked 147,118x in 94,140 Posts
    Mentioned
    2547 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    The most diverse Supreme Court ever confronts affirmative action

    In the recent past (prior to the conservative court) SCOTUS warned that AA was never intended to last forever and its days were numbered. Has the end come?

    The most diverse Supreme Court ever confronts affirmative action

    The most diverse group of Supreme Court justices in history will gather Monday to confront the issue that has vexed and deeply divided past courts: whether affirmative action in college admissions recognizes and nourishes a multicultural nation or impermissibly divides Americans by race.

    The authority of college administrators to use race in a limited way to build a diverse student body has barely survived previous challenges. But even a defender of such policies, Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, wrote in 2003 that racial preferences were not likely to be needed in 25 years. And a more dominant conservative majority is in place now.


    It will be the first review by a Supreme Court on which White men do not make up the majority. The body has undergone an almost complete turnover since O’Connor’s prediction, and includes justices who say affirmative action programs directly shaped their lives.


    The court now has two Black members — who seem to have opposite views of whether race-based policies are authorized by the Constitution. The court’s most senior member, Justice Clarence Thomas, has written more about the topic than any other justice, and he is an outspoken opponent: “racial paternalism … is as poisonous and pernicious as any other form of discrimination,” he has written.


    Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, the court’s newest member and its first Black woman, staked out her position on just her second day on the bench: There is no reason to believe the Constitution forbids race-conscious policies. [In a pretty crazy twist of history and logic.]
    ΜOΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ


  2. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Peter1469 For This Useful Post:

    carolina73 (11-21-2022),Chris (11-01-2022),Common (10-30-2022),MisterVeritis (11-01-2022),pjohns (11-01-2022)

  3. #2
    Original Ranter
    Points: 856,676, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 99.9%
    Achievements:
    SocialCreated Album picturesOverdrive50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Peter1469's Avatar Advisor
    Karma
    496108
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    NOVA
    Posts
    241,090
    Points
    856,676
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    152,933
    Thanked 147,118x in 94,140 Posts
    Mentioned
    2547 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    And this case will affect the military. But again, a focus on low income assistance captures more minorities than a focus on race.

    And I don't care about a diverse military leadership. I care about having military leadership who can fight and win wars.

    Supreme Court Hears Race-Conscious Admissions Cases that Could Change the Face of the Military

    The Supreme Court heard arguments over the practice of race-based admissions in the United States on Monday, with military and national security experts waiting for a decision that could alter the demographics of who wears the uniform.


    The nation's top court listened to oral arguments for two cases that are challenging the admissions practices at both Harvard and the University of North Carolina -- schools that consider an applicant's race, among a variety of other factors, as part of their admissions process.



    Elizabeth Prelogar, the United States Solicitor General, described race-conscious admissions as "vitally important to our nation's military," pointing to the need to have a diverse group of students in ROTC programs and the nation's service academies in order to develop diverse military leadership.



    "The individuals who are entering college today ... are the closed universe of individuals who are going to be eligible for leadership in the military in 20 and 30 years' time," she argued.



    Prelogar was arguing on behalf of the two schools, saying that "when students of all races and backgrounds come to college and live together and learn together, they become better colleagues, better citizens and better leaders."


    Opponents of race-conscious admissions have argued in court briefings that the racial composition of military leadership should not be a priority, saying that efforts to improve diversity were "diluting the quality of military officer leadership."
    ΜOΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ


  4. #3
    Points: 23,752, Level: 37
    Level completed: 51%, Points required for next Level: 598
    Overall activity: 35.0%
    Achievements:
    10000 Experience PointsVeteran
    LWW's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    2487
    Join Date
    Jan 2021
    Location
    People's Midwest Republic of Ameristan
    Posts
    7,900
    Points
    23,752
    Level
    37
    Thanks Given
    2,825
    Thanked 2,477x in 1,800 Posts
    Mentioned
    49 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Peter1469 View Post
    Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, the court’s newest member and its first Black woman, staked out her position on just her second day on the bench: There is no reason to believe the Constitution forbids race-conscious policies. [In a pretty crazy twist of history and logic.]
    From that, we could only assume than Justice Jackson agrees with FDR's incarceration of US citizens of Japanese descent being incarerated solely for being of Japanese descent ... as well as her namesake Andrew Jackson's theft of millions of acres of native land and force marching them to reservations?
    "Buy a man eat fish, the day, teach a man to a life time! "
    "As one computer said, if
    you're on the train and they say 'PORTAL BRIDGE' you know you better make other plans."
    - Joseph Robinette Biden -

  5. The Following User Says Thank You to LWW For This Useful Post:

    MisterVeritis (11-21-2022)

  6. #4
    Original Ranter
    Points: 856,676, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 99.9%
    Achievements:
    SocialCreated Album picturesOverdrive50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Peter1469's Avatar Advisor
    Karma
    496108
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    NOVA
    Posts
    241,090
    Points
    856,676
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    152,933
    Thanked 147,118x in 94,140 Posts
    Mentioned
    2547 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by LWW View Post
    From that, we could only assume than Justice Jackson agrees with FDR's incarceration of US citizens of Japanese descent being incarerated solely for being of Japanese descent ... as well as her namesake Andrew Jackson's theft of millions of acres of native land and force marching them to reservations?
    I am sure she would twist herself out of that pretzel.
    ΜOΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ


  7. #5
    Points: 60,815, Level: 60
    Level completed: 24%, Points required for next Level: 1,535
    Overall activity: 7.0%
    Achievements:
    Tagger First ClassSocialVeteran50000 Experience Points
    pjohns's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    14483
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    7,867
    Points
    60,815
    Level
    60
    Thanks Given
    19,329
    Thanked 4,177x in 2,689 Posts
    Mentioned
    42 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Peter1469 View Post
    In the recent past (prior to the conservative court) SCOTUS warned that AA was never intended to last forever and its days were numbered. Has the end come?

    The most diverse Supreme Court ever confronts affirmative action

    The most diverse group of Supreme Court justices in history will gather Monday to confront the issue that has vexed and deeply divided past courts: whether affirmative action in college admissions recognizes and nourishes a multicultural nation or impermissibly divides Americans by race.

    The authority of college administrators to use race in a limited way to build a diverse student body has barely survived previous challenges. But even a defender of such policies, Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, wrote in 2003 that racial preferences were not likely to be needed in 25 years. And a more dominant conservative majority is in place now.


    It will be the first review by a Supreme Court on which White men do not make up the majority. The body has undergone an almost complete turnover since O’Connor’s prediction, and includes justices who say affirmative action programs directly shaped their lives.


    The court now has two Black members — who seem to have opposite views of whether race-based policies are authorized by the Constitution. The court’s most senior member, Justice Clarence Thomas, has written more about the topic than any other justice, and he is an outspoken opponent: “racial paternalism … is as poisonous and pernicious as any other form of discrimination,” he has written.


    Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, the court’s newest member and its first Black woman, staked out her position on just her second day on the bench: There is no reason to believe the Constitution forbids race-conscious policies. [In a pretty crazy twist of history and logic.]
    This is an excellent post. My only point of disagreement would be the statement that we are a "multicultural" society. (Certainly, we are multi-racial and multi-ethnic; but I believe in assimilation, not in multiculturalism.)

    Justice Jackson has recused herself from the former, as she attended Harvard, and served on its Board of Overseers until last spring. (I am really not sure that her recusal was necessary; but perhaps it was done out of "an abundance of caution," as some like to say.)

    My guess is that affirmative action, in college admissions, will either be cut back substantially, or altogether abolished--with the latter probably a more likely outcome.
    Last edited by pjohns; 11-01-2022 at 01:08 PM.

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to pjohns For This Useful Post:

    Peter1469 (11-01-2022)

  9. #6
    Original Ranter
    Points: 856,676, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 99.9%
    Achievements:
    SocialCreated Album picturesOverdrive50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Peter1469's Avatar Advisor
    Karma
    496108
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    NOVA
    Posts
    241,090
    Points
    856,676
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    152,933
    Thanked 147,118x in 94,140 Posts
    Mentioned
    2547 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by pjohns View Post
    This is an excellent post. My only point of disagreement would be the statement that we are a "multicultural" society. (Certainly, we are multi-racial and multi-ethnic; but I believe in assimilation, not in multiculturalism.)

    Justice Jackson has recused herself from the former, as she attended Harvard, and served on its Board of Overseers until last spring. (I am really not sure that her recusal was necessary; but perhaps it was done out of "an abundance of caution," as some like to say.)

    My guess is that affirmative action, in college admissions, will either be cut back substantially, or altogether abolished--with the latter probably a more likely outcome.
    I think so too. But if colleges gave scholarships to low income students they would capture as many minorities as they want.
    ΜOΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ


  10. The Following User Says Thank You to Peter1469 For This Useful Post:

    pjohns (11-01-2022)

  11. #7
    Points: 262,895, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 89.0%
    Achievements:
    50000 Experience PointsSocialVeteranTagger First ClassOverdrive
    Awards:
    Activity Award
    MisterVeritis's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    307724
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Northern Alabama
    Posts
    104,157
    Points
    262,895
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    94,449
    Thanked 39,098x in 27,770 Posts
    Mentioned
    385 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    It is time to end affirmative action.
    Call your state legislators and insist they approve the Article V convention of States to propose amendments.


    I pledge allegiance to the Constitution as written and understood by this nation's founders, and to the Republic it created, an indivisible union of sovereign States, with liberty and justice for all.

  12. #8
    Original Ranter
    Points: 856,676, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 99.9%
    Achievements:
    SocialCreated Album picturesOverdrive50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Peter1469's Avatar Advisor
    Karma
    496108
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    NOVA
    Posts
    241,090
    Points
    856,676
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    152,933
    Thanked 147,118x in 94,140 Posts
    Mentioned
    2547 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by MisterVeritis View Post
    It is time to end affirmative action.
    Looks like SCOTUS is going to take your advise.
    ΜOΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ


  13. The Following User Says Thank You to Peter1469 For This Useful Post:

    MisterVeritis (11-21-2022)

  14. #9
    Original Ranter
    Points: 856,676, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 99.9%
    Achievements:
    SocialCreated Album picturesOverdrive50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Peter1469's Avatar Advisor
    Karma
    496108
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    NOVA
    Posts
    241,090
    Points
    856,676
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    152,933
    Thanked 147,118x in 94,140 Posts
    Mentioned
    2547 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Look like Harvard and Yale are getting out in front of this in order to keep their diverse rich student body.

    Opinion
    Top law schools bow out of U.S. News rankings. What’s the thinking?


    [COLOR=var(--wpds-colors-gray40)]In 1983, a weekly newsmagazine called U.S. News & World Report launched an annual ranking of colleges, planting the seed of what became a revolutionary change to the magazine’s business model — and eventually, to that of higher education. The magazine’s rankings of colleges, law and business schools, hospitals and so forth are now well into their fourth decade; they have outlived the print edition of U.S. News itself. And though critics frequently complained that the rankings were silly — how does it make sense to “rank” Amherst against West Point or an evangelical Christian college like Wheaton? — schools vied to improve their position on the merciless ordinal list.





    [COLOR=var(--wpds-colors-gray40)]To improve their “selectivity” score, schools sought more applications, for example by upgrading campus facilities and casting wider recruiting nets. Scholarship money and tuition discounts were strategically deployed to boost the average test scores and GPAs of incoming students. Law schools and business schools sometimes hired their own graduates into temporary positions, raising suspicions that they wanted to raise their performance on job-placement metrics. None of which, you will notice, had anything to do with improving the quality of the education. Indeed it arguably made education worse, diverting resources from teaching into pointless, zero-sum competition.

    [/COLOR]
    [COLOR=var(--wpds-colors-gray40)]So perhaps we should cheer the news that three major law schools are pulling out of the rankings. On Wednesday, No. 1-ranked Yale Law School announced it would no longer provide U.S. News access to the proprietary data that helps the service rank schools. Harvard (tied for No. 4) quickly signaled that it, too, would be withdrawing from the process. The following day, the ninth-ranked University of California at Berkeley joined the exodus. It’s plausible that a lot of other top law schools will follow.[/COLOR]



    [COLOR=var(--wpds-colors-gray40)]
    But perhaps we should also ask why the schools are doing this and what effects their withdrawal are likely to have.

    [/COLOR]
    [COLOR=var(--wpds-colors-gray40)]The schools cite only the highest motives. The statement from Yale Law School Dean Heather Gerken proclaims that “U.S. News rankings are profoundly flawed — they disincentivize programs that support public interest careers, champion need-based aid, and welcome working-class students into the profession.” Harvard Law School echoes her complaints, saying the rankings “work against law schools’ commitments to enhancing the socioeconomic diversity of our classes; to allocating financial aid to students based on need; and, through loan repayment and public interest fellowships, to supporting graduates interested in careers serving the public interest.”

    [/COLOR]

    [COLOR=var(--wpds-colors-gray40)]Yet it’s impossible not to notice the timing. Yale has recently suffered some reputational damage over its hostility to conservatives, leading some to wonder whether the school was pulling out to avoid the embarrassment of losing its No. 1 slot. This also comes right after the Supreme Court signaled that it is preparing to disallow affirmative action programs in higher education. One way to keep from being held accountable for discriminating against Asian students, or in favor of underrepresented minorities, is to down-weight or eliminate objective metrics such as test scores in favor of harder-to-compare criteria such as essays, interviews and recommendations. Since doing so would cause the schools to suffer in the U.S. News rankings, perhaps they’re preemptively taking their ball and going home.

    [/COLOR]



    Whether you think that’s a good or a bad thing is apt to depend on your feelings about conservatives as well as affirmative action. But even if you support the schools withdrawing from the rankings on either point, there are a couple of caveats worth considering.




    [/COLOR]
    ΜOΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ


  15. #10
    Points: 13,034, Level: 27
    Level completed: 43%, Points required for next Level: 516
    Overall activity: 0.2%
    Achievements:
    OverdriveSocial10000 Experience Points1 year registered
    LescoBrandon's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    2542
    Join Date
    Oct 2022
    Posts
    3,966
    Points
    13,034
    Level
    27
    Thanks Given
    2,689
    Thanked 2,532x in 1,663 Posts
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Harvard and Yale don't want to be ranked anymore because they know their woke agenda is turning out crappy lawyers.

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts