Supreme Court Adds Two New Education Affirmative Action Cases to its Docket and the Left Cries ‘Armageddon’ – Opinion

The US Supreme Court revealed Monday that it will hear new cases in the coming term. It was shocking to learn that two cases of affirmative action in higher education were included. This decision is surprising because since 2016 the Supreme Court has been operating like a dog with university affirmative-action challenges, so it is not unusual for them to take up two cases. It is clear that people are hungry to trim the edges.

Students for Fair Admissions, University of North Carolina is the first of these cases. The Supreme Court will be asked to resolve two questions.

(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; and (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.

Grutter v. Bollinger is the 2003 case that permitted race-based admissions quotas so long as they were tarted up with enough diversity lipstick to divert Anthony Kennedy’s attention. Although the UNC case was already tried in the District Court, University won, however, it was not heard by the Fourth Circuit.

It is more fascinating. In Students for Fair Admissions Inc. v. President & Fellows of Harvard College racial discrimination is alleged but it specifically targets Harvard’s policy of creating a numerical ceiling for the number of Asian students admitted to each class by inventing intangible categories like “unlikable” to torpedo the remainder in the “interview” process. See Asian students sue Harvard over discrimination. Trump’s administration filed a brief in support of the Asian students. However, the Biden administration changed their position. (see Biden Administration Decides that Racial Discrimination at Yale is Totally Okay as Long As the Right Race Is Involved. Here are the Harvard cases.

(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; and (2) 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.

Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin was the last case involving affirmative action in higher education. It was decided by a 4-to-3 vote. Alito, Thomas, and Roberts dissenting. Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the late Ruth Bader Ginsburg, praised this case.

In an interview not long after the Texas case was decided, Justice Ginsburg said it would endure.

“If Justice Kagan had been there, it would have been 5 to 3,” she said. “That’s about as solid as you can get.”

“I don’t expect that we’re going to see another affirmative action case,” Justice Ginsburg added, “at least in education.”

Rightfully, the Left sees it as Armageddon to our system for higher education’s racial spoils. These two cases were combined in order to not only reconsider Grutter, but also to independently examine racial discrimination against Asian-alone applicants and White-plus Asian applicants. Given that the weak sister of the bunch, John Roberts, has opined “the way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race,” it is hard to imagine any of the newer members of the court giving racially discriminatory admissions procedures any more respect. Vox.com, motto: Zero Days without losing our credibility to ground; Ian Milhiser is a remarkable writer.

Conservative judges tend to believe that students should have their own interests at college. And, given the Supreme Court’s 6-3 divide, that conservative viewpoint is likely to prevail.

The Court’s decision to hear the Harvard and UNC cases, moreover, adds two more major cases to the Court’s already-bulging culture war docket.

In Barrett’s first term on the bench, the Court made expanding the right of religious conservatives to seek exemptions from laws that they object to on religious grounds one of its highest priorities. And the Court heard cases earlier this term that could significantly expand gun rights. force taxpayers to fund religious education,And even overrule Roe V. Wade.

Oddly enough, the Supreme Court’s decision in this case will have an impact far beyond higher education. What the Supreme Court is really deciding is what happens to the entire Diversity, Inclusive, and Equity grift. It’s deciding whether it will have ethnic-specific dorms or dining rooms in universities. It’s deciding whether it will continue to support a completely unconstitutional system that benefits no minority child from an upper-middle class household. It’s also considering whether it will continue being a member of the racist grievance system, which is ruining American politics. I hope they do the right thing and look at the Constitution…the part that forbids discrimination on the basis of race…and decides that maybe our highest court shouldn’t have a role in further racial discrimination.

Follow Us