Harvard lawyer's argument rebuked by Chief Justice

 Daily Caller:

Supreme Court Justice John Roberts called out Harvard University’s race-conscious admissions policies in an oral argument over a lawsuit that decides whether the university’s use of affirmative action is constitutional.

During the oral arguments of the case Students for Fair Admissions v. President and Fellows of Harvard, Roberts asked Harvard’s lawyer Seth Waxman if the university uses race as a determining factor during the admissions process. Waxman admitted that race is taken into consideration in the same way that “being an oboe player in a year in which the Harvard Radcliffe Orchestra needs an oboe player will be the tip.” (RELATED: ‘I Identify As An American Indian’: Alito Appears To Troll Defenders Of Affirmative Action)

“We did not fight a civil war about oboe players,” Roberts replied to Waxman. “We did fight a civil war to eliminate racial discrimination. And that’s why it’s a matter of considerable concern. I think it’s important for you to establish whether or not granting a credit based solely on skin color is based on a stereotype when you say this brings diversity of viewpoint.”

The Supreme Court heard oral arguments Monday to determine whether Harvard University and University of North Carolina (UNC) are unlawfully discriminating against white and Asian American students as a result of their race-based admission policies. The court is considering whether to overrule the landmark case Grutter v. Bollinger, which permitted universities to use race-conscious admission policies in order to further diversity at their institutions.
...

People should be selected because of their merit and not because of their race.  Merit is a color-blind concept.  It is how most athletic programs thrive and it should be the reason for admission policies. 

See, also:

Justice Thomas Unloads on Lawyer Defending Affirmative Action: ‘Diversity Seems to Mean Everything for Everyone’

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Should Republicans go ahead and add Supreme Court Justices to head off Democrats

Washington Post: Some Democrats eye adding more justices to the Supreme Court to change its ideological bent The once-remote idea has gained the attention of liberals angered by the GOP push to remake the federal courts. Probably the easy way to defeat this court-packing scheme is for Trump to propose doing the same thing now.  It would lead to Democrat denunciations and claims that it would be wrong, thereby blowing up any attempt by them in the unfortunate event of Democrats winning a presidential election.
Read more

29 % of companies say they are unlikely to keep insurance after Obamacare

Conn Carroll: A new survey of 368 midsize to large companies found that 29% of them are considering terminating their active employee health care plans when Obamacare is full implemented in 2014. Only 71% of employers surveyed said they did not expect to drop their health coverage, while 20% said they did not know and 9% said they were planning to exit. The latest survey, conducted by Towers Watson, echoes an ealier survey by McKinsey & Co. finding that 30% of private-sector employers were planning to drop their employee health insurance coverage by 2014. When the Congressional Budget Office crunched Obamacare's spending numbers, they estimated that only 7% of employees currently covered by employer-sponsored plans would lose their plans. ... This means the cost of the health care fiasco will be hundreds of billions more than estimated by the CBO and Congressional Democrat. It is also clear that Obama's pledge that you could keep your health care plan if you wanted t...
Read more

Is the F-35 obsolete?

Headline USA: Pentagon Fires Back after Musk Calls Its Most Expensive Project ‘Obsolete’ 'Yeah, as I'm sure you can appreciate, Mr. Musk is, currently, a private citizen, I'm not going to make any comments about what a private citizen may have to say about the F-35....'   ... ... Drones appear to be replacing jets for many operations.  The Russia-Ukraine war is an example of that.  Drones are often hard to detect and can be used for intelligence operations as well as for attacking enemy targets.  It would not surprise me to see drones engaging other drones in combat.  They also cost much less than manned fighters.  
Read more