Little-Acorn
06-24-2013, 03:25 PM
Today the Supreme Court handed down a 7-1 decision in the case Fisher v. U.Texas.
The Univ. of Texas had declined admission to a caucasian student, who sued on grounds that it was a case of "reverse discrimination".
The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals had ruled that the University's action was OK, since the Univ had a "compelling interest" in diversity of its student body, and because its program was "narrowly tailored" to achieve that goal of diversity.
Today the Supremes decided that the Fifth Circuit Court was wrong... but not because the Univ had shown reverse discrimination. The 5th Circuit was wrong for not using the right DECISION METHODS. The Supremes said that, if they had applied "Strict scrutiny", as defined by three earlier Supreme Court cases, then it would have been OK to reject the caucasian student because of her race. The Supremes then sent the case back to the 5th Circuit, with instructions to try again.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/11-345#writing-11-345_OPINION_3
What a cop-out. This was the Supremes' chance to declare flatly that one of those three previous Supreme Court (Grutter v. Bollinger) case was wrongly decided. In that case, the Supremes had ruled in 2003 that racial discrimination (aka reverse discrimination) was OK if the school could show a compelling interest in diversity (something no University has ever sensibly shown). Such reverse discrimination is flatly outlawed, of course, by the 14th amendment, no matter how nice "diversity" might look to some group of dreamy do-gooders.
But the Supremes didn't even try to look at those earlier cases. In the Opinion of the Court, Justice Kennedy wrote that those three cases were "taken as given", meaning the Court considers them automatically right despite the clear racism dictated by the Grutter case. This case was doomed from the start, as a result.
Perhaps some blame can be assigned to the student's lawyers, who apparently didn't ask the courts to reconsider the earlier case, but merely asked if the University properly followed those earlier cases. Here the Supremes decided that the 5th Circuit hadn't properly answered that question... but implied what the proper answer would be. At no point did they consider whether those thre earlier cases themselves, were wrong.
So, the Supremes punted. In a way, they decided that an earlier Supreme Court decision, overruled the Constitution itself.
I guess we need to change the Oath that Supreme Court justices take. Now it needs to be, "I solemnly swear to protect and defend the previous rulings of this Court, against all enemies foreign and domestic, and against the Constitution of the United States of America, so help me Gawd."
The Univ. of Texas had declined admission to a caucasian student, who sued on grounds that it was a case of "reverse discrimination".
The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals had ruled that the University's action was OK, since the Univ had a "compelling interest" in diversity of its student body, and because its program was "narrowly tailored" to achieve that goal of diversity.
Today the Supremes decided that the Fifth Circuit Court was wrong... but not because the Univ had shown reverse discrimination. The 5th Circuit was wrong for not using the right DECISION METHODS. The Supremes said that, if they had applied "Strict scrutiny", as defined by three earlier Supreme Court cases, then it would have been OK to reject the caucasian student because of her race. The Supremes then sent the case back to the 5th Circuit, with instructions to try again.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/11-345#writing-11-345_OPINION_3
What a cop-out. This was the Supremes' chance to declare flatly that one of those three previous Supreme Court (Grutter v. Bollinger) case was wrongly decided. In that case, the Supremes had ruled in 2003 that racial discrimination (aka reverse discrimination) was OK if the school could show a compelling interest in diversity (something no University has ever sensibly shown). Such reverse discrimination is flatly outlawed, of course, by the 14th amendment, no matter how nice "diversity" might look to some group of dreamy do-gooders.
But the Supremes didn't even try to look at those earlier cases. In the Opinion of the Court, Justice Kennedy wrote that those three cases were "taken as given", meaning the Court considers them automatically right despite the clear racism dictated by the Grutter case. This case was doomed from the start, as a result.
Perhaps some blame can be assigned to the student's lawyers, who apparently didn't ask the courts to reconsider the earlier case, but merely asked if the University properly followed those earlier cases. Here the Supremes decided that the 5th Circuit hadn't properly answered that question... but implied what the proper answer would be. At no point did they consider whether those thre earlier cases themselves, were wrong.
So, the Supremes punted. In a way, they decided that an earlier Supreme Court decision, overruled the Constitution itself.
I guess we need to change the Oath that Supreme Court justices take. Now it needs to be, "I solemnly swear to protect and defend the previous rulings of this Court, against all enemies foreign and domestic, and against the Constitution of the United States of America, so help me Gawd."