Supreme Court upholds Michigan affirmative action ban

  • metta

    Posts: 39104

    Apr 22, 2014 3:06 PM GMT

    Supreme Court upholds Mich. affirmative action ban

    http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/23/us/supreme-court-michigan-affirmative-action-ban.html?_r=0
  • FitGwynedd

    Posts: 1468

    Apr 22, 2014 3:39 PM GMT
    States' rights
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 22, 2014 4:08 PM GMT
    I find it interesting that in the case of voter mandated DOMA's the Courts are saying that voters cannot make such mandates but in the case of affirmative action the Courts are saying voters can make such mandates.
  • conservativej...

    Posts: 2465

    Apr 22, 2014 4:08 PM GMT
    Affirmative Action is an American thing. Just something that covers for a political lie.
  • Whipmagic

    Posts: 1481

    Apr 22, 2014 9:56 PM GMT
    This one may actually have implications for us: It is in many ways parallel to Romer v. Evans, where the Supreme Court threw out Colorado's constitutional amendment that invalidated all city ordinances and foreclosed any future state laws to recognize gay partnerships, without amending the constitution again. Then, SCOTUS said, in an opinion by Kennedy, that a public referendum cannot impose an extra burden on one group (like, having the constitution changed) that it does not on another, to pass a law etc.

    The Michigan case is in many ways very similar: it imposes an extra burden on African Americans to seek preferential treatment, which it does not impose on others, like alumni, athletes who can't read and write, or residents of the Upper Peninsula.

    I haven't read all the opinions and dissents yet - virtually every justice had his or her own take on this, but on the face of it I'm a but surprised that Kennedy didn't stick by his guns from the Romer case. I don't know if that means anything for us in the upcoming battle when the state bans on gay marriages come up. It might warrant a close reading of his opinion today, though. *Can't quite will myself to do it yet...*

  • CSPYNY

    Posts: 187

    Apr 22, 2014 10:43 PM GMT
    I don't understand how it's morally right to give preference to one group of people over another.

    Accept the best candidate to college. Hire the best candidate for the job.
  • Whipmagic

    Posts: 1481

    Apr 22, 2014 10:47 PM GMT
    cspyny saidI don't understand how it's morally right to give preference to one group of people over another.

    Accept the best candidate to college. Hire the best candidate for the job.


    This is not what this case was about. Should a public referendum be allowed to impose a disability on one group over another - here, African Americans will need a constitutional amendment to seek something, whereas Upper Peninsula residents won't have to jump through the same hoops to get the same. I don't think so.