“Supreme Court strikes down affirmative action in college admissions”

The Supreme Court ruled that race-conscious admissions processes are unconstitutional in a pair of cases involving Harvard University and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

Here’s what we’re following:


Comment: This is clearly the big news story here in the States today. This may surprise many here, but I am not surprised by this decision nor am I bothered by it. Choosing who is and, because of limited enrollment, is not admitted to college on the basis of race not only smacks of bold-faced racism, but is an absolutely lazy way to determine who can attend a particular institution of higher education.

As far as I can tell, this ruling does not outlaw affirmative action, just race based affirmative action. In the pursuit of diversity or merely to shape the make up of the student body, admission boards can still consider other factors like socio-economic background. That would give the otherwise qualified poor white kid from the hills of Appalachia a shot at some prestigious college. Although he’d still be up against the legacy kids. I find that system to be absolutely bullshit. It needs to go.

Oddly enough, it appears the Court let stand the same practice in the military services.


This entry was posted in Current Affairs, government, TTG. Bookmark the permalink.

11 Responses to “Supreme Court strikes down affirmative action in college admissions”

  1. leith says:

    Go after the legacy admissions next. Tens or hundreds of thousands of those clog up the system and prevent much better qualified students from getting in.

    • Laura Wilson says:

      Amen…the legacy admissions are discriminatory to the max! Also…they could just start at the bottom of the income barrel and admit all of those…leave the rich to go to the state schools! Having attended a big multi-ethnic high school and then UC before affirmative action…I prefer the mix and am not at all concerned that I might have had to go to a different school.

  2. al says:

    Just what does this protend? As noted in Mother Jones:

    … in his majority opinion, Chief Justice John Roberts carved out what could be interpreted as a small loophole in his decision: “Nothing in this opinion should be construed as prohibiting universities from considering an applicant’s discussion of how race affected his or her life, be it through discrimination, inspiration, or otherwise,” Roberts wrote at the end of his opinion.

    But Roberts himself insists that this is not a backdoor to affirmative action. “A benefit to a student who overcame racial discrimination, for example, must be tied to that student’s courage and determination… In other words, the student must be treated based on his or her experiences as an individual—not on the basis of race.”

  3. cobo says:

    Perhaps what needs to be discussed is the complete “repurposing” of higher education, and its leadership in the K-12 schools. Everyone has a place, and should be supported and educated as far as their talents allow. Imagine if every son or daughter who wanted to make their contribution in healthcare was allowed to progress up the ladder, including education, training and on-the-job-learning, to attain what heights their gifts could master, some can become techs, some nurses, some doctors, some specialiasts, some administrators… That’s just one path. Each university might assess and monitor its region for water and food production resources, resource and productive advantages… Each bio/geographical region self-supportive as far as possible and self-referential in its development… That’s a vision for how peoples and regions could assimilate to a “one-world” administration, without the need for obedience collars — or just burn it all down.

  4. scott s. says:

    Fortunately (I suppose?) the service academies are exempted from any requirement of color-blindness (and our DEI experts will tell us “color-blind” is racist). That’s why the experiment with removing photos from USN selection boards was terminated.

  5. TonyL says:

    “In the pursuit of diversity or merely to shape the make up of the student body, admission boards can still consider other factors like socio-economic background”

    That’s what affirmative action should be about. Giving qualified poor kids a chance to break out of the vicious cycle of poverty.

    • Al says:

      Target LOW income zipcodes in urban and RURAL areas

    • billy roche says:

      There IS a way for that poor kid to rise above the “vicious cycle of poverty”; work. I challenge anyone to come from a poorer zip than mine so I chose a state school. That’s what I could afford and I was paying. Mom and dad c/n. I worked as a factory hand summers; good money union scale. I worked winter breaks delivering Christmas mail; good money union scale. I worked two years as the night janitor at the college dining hall (b/c adept at plunger mechanics) mopped floors. I bussed tables when I could. Finished in four years b/c, did I mention it – I was paying. Some friends from the old neighborhood did things differently. Some did their military svc, got GI Bill benes and then went to college. Others took a break from school, worked, made some money, went back and finished. Still others stayed home, went to Junior College, then to a “name” school for their last two years. They may have needed five years but everybody finished. I signed up after college, wore my green meanies for three and then used my GI Bill for an MBA and more. Driving through the neighborhood I see none of the old crowd. Apparently everyone “broke the vicious cycle of poverty”. Fancy that. BTW, I owed uncle about 5,000 bucks when I finished in ’68. I was damned glad N.D.S.L. were available. A few months after getting home from the Army the gubmint informed me of my schedule for repayment. I think I was all paid up by 1976; every penny. Poor kids don’t need to be “given” any thing other than choice. In my day the choice for most was hope, or literally “dope”. If you had half a brain it was an easy choice. Back then, brains had something to do w/college; right?

    • John Minehan says:

      Kids who don’t seem too promidsing to start with, often really have an opportunity to grow in those places. “Stonewall” Jackson is not a bad example at USMA (although, he went on to be COL [R} Lang’s alma mater’s worst Professor) , went on to do other things though . . . .

  6. Fred says:

    Can’t wait for the diversity set asides in state and federal contracting to come before the court.

  7. morongobill says:

    The Supremes have historically been reluctant to touch the military.

Comments are closed.