Midwest Chick's Place

After the Supreme Court ruling today pretty much putting the kibosh on affirmative action for college admissions, academics and Leftists (but I repeat myself) are collectively losing their fucking minds.

The usual race-baiters are flipping their lids and there’s already been one suspicious package at the Supreme Court building.

Idiot quote of the day goes to Donna Brazile (at the first link above):

“The 14 Amendment, the equal protection clause, would guarantee us a color-blind society,” she said. “And now the most effective tool, an affirmative tool, to eliminate barriers, a tool that would give us opportunity is now weakened.” 

Seriously.  Affirmative action is anything BUT color-blind.  It prioritizes skin color (except if its yellow or white) over any other criteria.   And because it does that, then striving for excellence or earning your place at the table goes by the wayside.

Justice Thomas, who authored the majority opinion and wrote a separate concurring opinion, both blasting new Justice Kentaji Brown Jackson and showed why the Lefties have targeted him so vehemently.  

Accordingly, JUSTICE JACKSON’s race-infused world view falls flat at each step. Individuals are the sum of their unique experiences, challenges, and accomplishments. What matters is not the barriers they face, but how they choose to confront them. And their race is not to blame for everything—good or bad—that happens in their lives. A contrary, myopic world view based on individuals’ skin color to the total exclusion of their personal choices is nothing short of racial determinism.

JUSTICE JACKSON then builds from her faulty premise to call for action, arguing that courts should defer to “experts” and allow institutions to discriminate on the basis of race. Make no mistake: Her dissent is not a vanguard of the innocent and helpless. It is instead a call to empower privileged elites, who will “tell us [what] is required to level the playing field” among castes and classifications that they alone can divine. Then, after siloing us all into racial castes and pitting those castes against each other, the dissent somehow believes that we will be able—at some undefined point—to “march forward together” into some utopian vision. Social movements that invoke these sorts of rallying cries, historically, have ended disastrously.

Unsurprisingly, this tried-and-failed system defies both law and reason. Start with the obvious: If social reorganization in the name of equality may be justified by the mere fact of statistical disparities among racial groups, then that reorganization must continue until these disparities are fully eliminated, regardless of the reasons for the disparities and the cost of their elimination. If blacks fail a test at higher rates than their white counterparts (regardless of whether the reason for the disparity has anything at all to do with race), the only solution will be race-focused measures. If those measures were to result in blacks failing at yet higher rates, the only solution would be to double down. In fact, there would seem to be no logical limit to what the government may do to level the racial playing field—outright wealth transfers, quota systems, and racial preferences would all seem permissible. In such a system, it would not matter how many innocents suffer race-based injuries; all that would matter is reaching the race-based goal.

Read the whole thing here.  I believe his opinion starts on page 49. 

Even Chief Justice Roberts stepped up:

“The principal dissent wrenches our case law from its context, going to lengths to ignore the parts of that law it does not like. The serious reservations that Bakke, Grutter, and Fisher had about racial preferences go unrecognized,” Roberts began. “The unambiguous requirements of the Equal Protection Clause — ‘the most rigid,’ ‘searching’ scrutiny it entails — go without note.”

“And the repeated demands that race-based admissions programs must end go overlooked — contorted, worse still, into a demand that such programs never stop,” Roberts continued. “Most troubling of all is what the dissent must make these omissions to defend: a judiciary that picks winners and losers based on the color of their skin. While the dissent would certainly not permit university programs that discriminated against black and Latino applicants, it is perfectly willing to let the programs here continue. In its view, this Court is supposed to tell state actors when they have picked the right races to benefit. Separate but equal is ‘inherently unequal,’ said Brown. 347 U. S., at 495 (emphasis added). It depends, says the dissent.”

This is going to have a lot of institutions looking at their processes on the admissions side.  They’ll try to get around it (Harvard has already said they are going to try to find a loophole), but with this ruling, it will be easier to take them to task for it.

And this is the stupid on Twitter. And they say we’re the racists….

*Quote stolen from the movie Hudson Hawk