- Israel hits symbols of Hamas rule; scores killed
- Mississippi abortion law can’t be enforced
- Teacher who survived Sandy Hook has book deal
- Jury awards Jesse Ventura $1.8M in case vs. ‘American Sniper’ author Chris Kyle
- Middle Eastern firm’s deal to manage U.S. cargo port raises security concerns
- Bob McDonnell’s defense: Lonely wife developed ‘crush’ on CEO
- Chinese hackers stole ‘huge quantities’ of sensitive data on Israel’s Iron Dome
- House Republicans unveil bill to speed deportations of border children
- Californians protest middle school for hiring white man to teach cultural studies
- Killer’s sentencing overturned because mother couldn’t find seat in courtroom
EDITORIAL: Court strikes blow for campus colorblindness on affirmative action
Justices uphold Michigan’s race-neutral admissions policy
Question of the Day
The Supreme Court on Tuesday restored common sense as well as the word of the Constitution by upholding Michigan's ban of racial preferences in state college admissions. Michigan voters had put the ban in their state constitution, ordering state colleges and universities not to "discriminate against, or grant preferential treatment to, any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity or national origin."
This was clear, straightforward language that even a judge could understand, and the vote as an unequivocal 6 to 2, with the liberal Justice Stephen Breyer joining the usual five conservative justices. They understood George Orwell's point, in his novel "1984," that proclaiming that war is peace, freedom is slavery, ignorance is strength — and, in this case, colorblindness is racism — does not make it so.
After decades of affirmative-action nonsense the public understands that however well-intentioned such policies may be, affirmative action reinforces the notion that minorities can't succeed on their own merits. Sometimes, when they do, accomplishment means little.
When white applicants for admissions are rejected to favor less-qualified minorities, it invariably fuels racial resentment. The quota system once used by the University of California at Berkeley meant that highly qualified Asian students were rejected to favor other minorities so admissions could create a "desirable" and arbitrary "mix."
In his concurring opinion Tuesday, Justice Antonin Scalia called it folly to divide Americans into racial blocs. "Does a half-Latino, half-American Indian have Latino interests, American-Indian interests, both, or half of both?"
The decision was further a victory for the rights of the states. Writing for the majority, Justice Anthony Kennedy concluded that the courts did not have the authority to set aside the Michigan law. "This case is not about the debate how the debate over racial preferences should be resolved," he said. "It is about who may resolve it. Michigan voters used the initiative system to bypass public officials who were deemed not responsive to the concerns of a majority of the voters with respect to a policy of granting race-based preferences that raises difficult and delicate issues."
By Any Means Necessary, a coalition of the left that sought to overturn the Michigan amendment, demands admissions based on racial calculus. The group's spokesman called Tuesday's ruling in Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action "racist" and said that "this court is declaring its intention to uphold white privilege and to create a new Jim Crow legal system."
In her dissent, Justice Sonia Sotomayor bought into the convoluted reasoning that banning the use of racial preferences unfairly targets minorities. "Today's decision eviscerates an important strand of our equal-protection jurisprudence," she wrote, joined only by the hopelessly liberal Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
Most of all, the decision was a victory for common sense. School administrators shouldn't be in the position of treating the student body like a television set where it can be lightened or darkened with the turn of a knob. It makes only good sense to say that a qualified student is welcome, regardless of his — or her — race or creed.
About the Author
- LETTER TO THE EDITOR: Reject any legislation dubbed 'comprehensive'
- LETTER TO THE EDITOR: Media are complicit in Hamas' tactics
- LETTER TO THE EDITOR: Gazans should help defeat Hamas
- EDITORIAL: The impeachment trap
- EDITORIAL: Illegal aliens in the shadows? What shadows?
Latest Blog Entries
TWT Video Picks
Get Breaking Alerts
- Boehner rules out impeachment: 'Scam started by Democrats'
- Obama thanks Muslims for 'building the very fabric of our nation'
- Obama's brother wears Hamas scarf bearing anti-Israel slogans in photo
- Federal judge grants 90-day stay in D.C. gun case
- D.C. seeks to stay judge's order allowing gun owners to carry in public
- Tactical advantage: Russian military shows off impressive new gear
- Smugglers, rainstorm combine to poke holes in border fence
- Hillary Clinton: Forget Obama, George W. Bush made her 'proud to be an American'
- Obama: 'Not a new Cold War,' but new Russia sanctions announced
- McCLAUGHRY: Finish off the "Islamic State" quickly and cheaply