Supreme Court Upholds Michigan’s Block on Affirmative Action
Publicly funded colleges in Michigan still won't be able to take applicants' racial background information into consideration in the admissions process, as the U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday sided with a referendum that passed in the Great Lakes State in 2006 banning the practice.
Publicly funded colleges in Michigan still won’t be able to take applicants’ racial background information into consideration in the admissions process, as the U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday sided with a referendum that passed in the Great Lakes State in 2006 banning the practice in higher education.
Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ruth Bader Ginsburg cast the two dissenting votes in the 6-2 ruling (Justice Elena Kagan sat this one out), while Justices Clarence Thomas, Stephen Breyer and Antonin Scalia agreed with Michigan’s ban, CNN reported that day:
Justice Sonia Sotomayor, the court’s first Latina, reacted sharply to the decision.
“For members of historically marginalized groups, which rely on the federal courts to protect their constitutional rights, the decision can hardly bolster hope for a vision of democracy that preserves for all the right to participate meaningfully and equally in self-government,” Sotomayor wrote.
But three justices in the majority, Chief Justice John Roberts, Anthony Kennedy and Samuel Alito. concluded that the lower court did not have the authority to set aside the law. “This case is not about how the debate about racial preferences should be resolved. It is about who may resolve it,” Kennedy wrote.
This is the latest in a series of affirmative action cases that top courts in the U.S., along with SCOTUS, have considered in recent years. Click here for a comprehensive timeline beginning with President John F. Kennedy’s Executive Order 10925 from 1961.
If you're reading this, you probably already know that non-profit, independent journalism is under threat worldwide. Independent news sites are overshadowed by larger heavily funded mainstream media that inundate us with hype and noise that barely scratch the surface. We believe that our readers deserve to know the full story. Truthdig writers bravely dig beneath the headlines to give you thought-provoking, investigative reporting and analysis that tells you what’s really happening and who’s rolling up their sleeves to do something about it.
Like you, we believe a well-informed public that doesn’t have blind faith in the status quo can help change the world. Your contribution of as little as $5 monthly or $35 annually will make you a groundbreaking member and lays the foundation of our work.
Support Truthdig
Racial diversity in the hands of the ruling elites—political and corporate—is a tool for preserving white privilege, wealth and power.
A new report shows little change in freshman enrollment disparities, despite decades of affirmative action.
The top court ruled 4-3 Thursday morning that particular considerations of race in the University of Texas admissions process are constitutional.
The political pundit believes the tech company is not suppressing any political viewpoints, but he sees some troubling signs with the movement he loves.
In addition to causing stalemates on cases in progress, the justice's passing is likely to unleash a pitched battle to name his successor and generate a key issue in the fight for the presidency. Updated
There are currently no responses to this article.
Be the first to respond.