Supreme Court Upholds Michigan’s Affirmative Action Ban

Adam Liptak, New York Times, April 22, 2014

The Supreme Court on Tuesday upheld a Michigan constitutional amendment that bans affirmative action in admissions to the state’s public universities, in a fractured decision that revealed deep divisions among the justices over what role the government should play in protecting racial and ethnic minorities.

The 6-to-2 ruling effectively endorsed similar measures in seven other states and may encourage additional measures banning the use of race in admissions. States that forbid affirmative action in admissions decisions, like Texas, Florida and California, as well as Michigan, have seen a significant drop in the enrollment of black and Hispanic students in their most selective colleges and universities.

In five opinions spanning more than 100 pages, the justices set out starkly conflicting views. The justices in the majority, with varying degrees of vehemence, said that policies affecting minorities that do not involve intentional discrimination should ordinarily be decided at the ballot box rather than in the courtroom.

But Justice Sonia Sotomayor, in the longest and most significant dissent of her career, said the Constitution required special vigilance in light of the history of slavery, Jim Crow and “recent examples of discriminatory changes to state voting laws.”

Justice Anthony M. Kennedy’s controlling opinion for three justices took pains to say that the decision was a modest one.

“This case is not about how the debate about racial preferences should be resolved,” he wrote, in an opinion joined by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. “It is about who may resolve it. There is no authority in the Constitution of the United States or in this court’s precedents for the judiciary to set aside Michigan laws that commit this policy determination to the voters.”

His announcement of the decision from the bench was businesslike. Then Justice Sotomayor summarized her dissent, an unusual move signaling deep displeasure. She said the initiative put minorities to a burden not faced by other college applicants and so violated the Constitution’s equal protection clause.

“The Constitution does not protect racial minorities from political defeat,” she wrote. “But neither does it give the majority free rein to erect selective barriers against racial minorities.” Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg joined the dissent.

Justice Sotomayor seemed to mock one of Chief Justice Roberts’s most memorable lines. In a 2007 decision that limited the use of race in public school systems, he wrote, “The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.”

Justice Sotomayor recast the line. “The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race,” she wrote, “is to speak openly and candidly on the subject of race, and to apply the Constitution with eyes open to the unfortunate effects of centuries of racial discrimination.”

{snip}

In earlier cases, including one from June concerning the University of Texas, the court has said that race-conscious admissions policies can be constitutionally permissible in states that wish to use them. The new decision concerned the question of whether and how voters may prohibit affirmative action programs.

The Michigan initiative, known as Proposal 2, was a response to Grutter v. Bollinger, a 2003 Supreme Court decision that upheld the use of race as one factor among many in law school admissions to ensure educational diversity.

Proposal 2, approved in 2006 by 58 percent of Michigan’s voters, amended the state Constitution to prohibit discrimination or preferential treatment in public education, government contracting and public employment. Groups favoring affirmative action sued to block the part of the law concerning higher education.

In 2012, the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, in Cincinnati, ruled by a vote of 8 to 7 that the initiative violated the federal Constitution’s equal protection clause. The appeals court majority said the problem with the law was that it restructured the state’s political process by making it harder for disfavored minorities to press for change.

{snip}

Topics: , , ,

Share This

We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • kikz2

    luvit… golfclap….

  • While we’re celebrating, there’s one other cause to celebrate.

    Consider this:

    The Michigan Civil Rights Initiative (MCRI) was approved by Michigan voters in November 2006, by 58% to 42%. Remember, 2006 was a blue wave election cycle, and Michigan is a pretty blue state. On that same election day, the same voters re-elected Democrat Governor Jennifer Granholm and Democrat Senator Debbie Stabenov, and Democrats won every other statewide elected office — Except for one. Then-Attorney General Michael Cox, running for re-election, win. Coincidentally, Cox was the only Michigan Republican of any serious consequence who was a vocal supporter of MCRI, all the other ones, all the losers, were vocal opponents.

    Affirmative action is one of the prime ways that the red army has to poach soldiers from the blue army.

    • true about the poaching lotsa union votes could be grabbed on this topic as many want their family members to get a union job, or enter college – both restricted entry programs – for white males.

    • John R

      Yes, it is a victory for we race realists. But why did we win? My take: Affirmative action for BOTH blacks and Hispanics is one issue where even the bleeding heart upper middle class ni**er loving baby boomers are being affected negatively. They cannot buy their way out of that one, like they can black violence by living in all White neighborhoods. So, these same people complain about the big bad racist police “profiling” the poor Trayvons, because they themselves don’t live near the problem. But, if Trayvon is getting into college, and their sons or daughters aren’t getting admitted, hey, enough is enough! Suddenly, they aren’t so liberal! It’s easy to be liberal about blacks when they aren’t affecting you.

      • Michigan has 83 counties.

        In 2006, the Democrats running for re-election for Governor and Senate won and painted a majority of Michigan’s county map blue.

        MCRI only lose in 3 counties: Wayne (Detroit, black undertow), Washtenaw (Ann Arbor, University of Michigan), Ingham (Lansing the State Capital and Michigan State University in East Lansing).

        So the differential between people all across the state voting for Granholm and Stabenov then turning around and voting for MCRI wasn’t just the upper middle class black loving baby boomers. It represented a wide socioeconomic swath of Michigan voters.

        How could some people vote for Democrats running for office then turn around and vote for MCRI? Easy — They didn’t associate those Democrats’ Republican opponents with opposition to affirmative action. And for good reason — Because both Republicans running against Stabenov and Granholm openly opposed MCRI and supported AA. Like I said above, the one Republican that did support MCRI, Attorney General Michael Cox, wound up winning.

  • Luca

    Oh Lordy, looks like activism from the bench from the wise Latina. She is basically saying screw the law, we have an agenda to maintain. And while she is lamenting about the injustices towards minorities I have two questions for her: Question one: explain Asian minority performance, Question two: How many decades of special privileges does it take before blacks and browns can be judge solely on merit? I guess half a century is not enough.

    • Reverend Bacon

      I think you’ve nailed it. She is dumber than a caja de caca, but they still call her “justice Sotomayor.” This is a foreshadowing of things to come.

      Her whining about “recent examples of discriminatory changes to state voting laws” also telegraphs how she’s going to vote when any of the anti-fraud voting laws come to the court. It’s good that the voter fraud news is trickling out, but I don’t think we’ve even scratched the veneer of this topic.

      “…erect selective barriers against racial minorities…” does this mean knock down barriers against racial majorities? Otherwise, I can’t figure out how forbidding the use of race in admission decisions does anything but forbid the erection of any “barriers against racial minorities.” I hope she doesn’t serve out her expected 20+ year life on the bench. Maybe she’ll be offered a million-dollar job to go campaign for the right to discriminate racially with taxpayer funds.

      • r j p

        During undergrad at Princeton she was told to home over the summer and read children’s books her English was so poor. Yep, best and the brightest.

    • BonV.Vant

      blacks and browns have no merit, and they never will, this is what they do not want to face

    • Neuday

      Her argument in favor of racial preferences boils down to “Gibs me dat”. They don’t understand the concept of building, of earning, of producing, of serving others. They understand only power, force, fear; they can place their wisest in our courts but their “legal arguments” betray them. They are subhuman brutes and should be removed from our civilization, what’s left of it.

    • Jesse_from_Sweden

      You’re missing the very simple point.

      Sotomayor is defending Affirmative-Action because the reason she is on the supreme court is because of Affirmative-Action.

      • Geo1metric

        Her entire career is because of AA. A person of her talents would, under normal rules, never have been accepted to undergraduate college at Yale (I think that’s her alma mater) without AA.

    • Greg Thomas

      That’s what street activists do!

  • borogirl54

    I guess now blacks and Hispanics will be judged by their transcripts and test scores and not the color of their skin.

    • Tom Mixx

      Not really, The academics will just come at it from a different direction. They’ll apportion slots in the school according to economic categories. Obviously, that will end up allowing blacks and Hispanics to maintain their dumb presence on campus.

      • borogirl54

        I wonder if poor whites and Asians could benefit from that as well?

        • As a matter of fact, there was a study done that showed that colleges which admit people based on income, but that don’t take race into account, bring in plenty of poor white people but not very many poor blacks and Hispanics. That’s why they don’t want to do it that way. They don’t care about poor white people.

          • Kenner

            Seriously? I hadn’t heard of that study. The scam they try to use now is having them submit essays on their ‘life experiences’. If they submit race-based sob-stories, they get extra points for vibrancy.

          • It should come up if you Google “Experimenting with Class-Based Affirmative Action by Richard H Sander.” I just looked over it again. What it actually says is that, as far as minorities go, the percentages of blacks and American Indians plummeted, but Hispanics stayed the same (“if one controls for changes in applications” it says) and Asians increased.

        • Tom Mixx

          I don’t think that’s what the academics in Michigan would have in mind.

        • 1stworlder

          Economically disadvantaged women doesn’t mean the polish girl that grew up in a trailer park, but if the richest man in the world Mexican telecom monopoly and guy behind Obamaphones Carlos Slim had a daughter she could get it.

      • Reverend Bacon

        They will do what California did, which is to guarantee admission to the top 10 students from any high school, even if 9 of them are in jail.

        • borogirl54

          Isn’t that what Texas does in admitting the top ten percent of all high school students in Texas high schools?

          • Reverend Bacon

            I wouldn’t be surprised if they did. This uses so-called “segregation” to their advantage, no? Schools that are only 50-60% black and hispanic are unlikely to have many blacks or hispanics in the top 10%. But when it’s 80-90%, it’s highly likely.

    • Black Swan

      Don’t count on it. They’ll ignore it at U of M just like they’ve been ignoring Prop 2 since it passed.

    • roger smith

      Sadly, no. The University of Michigan will find other ways to discriminate against Whites and Asians. They will just have a more difficult time of it than they did before just like they do in the other states in which Affirmative Action has been struck down.

  • She said the initiative put minorities to a burden not faced by other college applicants and so violated the Constitution’s equal protection clause.
    _______________________________
    So a state law requiring the state to be colorblind is a “burden,” is it Madam Justice? Translation: Only anti-white racism can lift the burden and free the poor whiny minority races.
    The “wise latina” mind at work. And this anti-white mental state passes for legal scholarship!

    • Geo1metric

      Not sure it is looked upon as legal scholarship except by others like herself. After all, she is the of total affirmative action, and she knows it. She has probably preached aa all of her adult life, and so…

      “Most men can seldom accept even the simplest and most obvious truth if it obliges them to admit the falsity of conclusions which they have delighted in explaining to colleagues, which they have proudly taught to others, and which they have woven thread by thread into the fabric of their lives.”

    • The two most twisted words in civil rights law are “disparate impact”. These minorities are going to perform lower on average because of the already settled question about their IQs. But the way it is in America today, all they have to show is disparate impact, which means they can take their own innate low achievement and that unequal result itself, devoid of causal analysis, is considered dispositive in finding that a law is discriminatory.

      • Pro_Whitey

        And we know that the disparate impact is never going to go away, so to set elimination of disparate impact as a standard is an invitation to eternal tyranny.

    • 1stworlder

      She knows she would be nothing without affirmative action.

      • Diversity Fatigue

        And without Zero’s help that put her wide tail on the bench. I believe she also pulled the race card on a group of white firemen who were being passed over for jobs by less qualified blacks.

    • Diversity Fatigue

      What burden is on blacks and hispaniards?! Their IQ, yes, but wise and overweight latina didn’t want to go there.

  • Luke N

    The wise illiterate Latina and the Jew both don’t understand the constitution. The illiterate Latina would not have gotten to where she is if it were not for her race. Fat and overweight, a typical Hispanic, entitled to everything. I am glad the white men made the right decision, maybe this nation is not so screwed up after all.

    • So CAL Snowman

      Hell even the black man, Clarence Thomas, sided with the evil Whiteys against the wise Latina.

      • Clarence Thomas is one of, like, 3 sensible black people in America.

        • IstvanIN

          And they are all old.

      • fidel

        Don’t be surprised by Clarence Thomas. He consistently makes reasonable decisions.

      • Laura Dilworth

        he’s conservative

    • RisingReich

      They understand it just fine. Don’t dismiss the traitorous votes as ‘ignorance’. They know EXACTLY what they do.

      • Luke N

        Yes that is true. Perhaps the fat Latina is ignorant. But the Jew is not. The Jew has been supporting anti-white laws from birth.

    • Black Swan

      You forgot gay. That’s a critical component now.

    • roger smith

      You know there are three Jews on the Supreme Court. One voted with the majority, one dissented, and one did not vote.

  • IstvanIN

    There are plenty of countries where her kind run everything, in fact even a US Commonwealth. Fight for equality in one of those. Oh wait, they wouldn’t put up with your big mouth, no nothing opinion, you would be selling tacos on a street corner.

  • Truthseeker

    Centuries of evolution have discriminated against these “oppressed minority” groups. Whites were minding their own business and evolving separately, so don’t blame them for it.

    • willbest

      I would actually venture to say that Africans have the intelligence necessary to maintain a 1980-90’s state of technological civilization if they had the cultural morality of the western world.

      • RisingReich

        Not even close. Maybe 1600’s – maybe.

        • PvtCharlieSlate

          No more than pre-industrial.
          I wouldn’t trust them to maintain a simple D-valve steam engine.

      • MooTieFighter

        I’ll have to respectfully disagree.

      • 1stworlder

        You remember the part about guys with slide rulers doing the math that let white men walk on the moon. A smart phone has more computing power than the world did back then. They would have nothing beyond sub sahara Africa today.

        • willbest

          Yes but they don’t need to invent anything. They just need to be able to appropriate it from those that do (see Asia). Also, sending a person to the moon is not a requirement for a 1980’s civilization. Being able to construct a 50 story building , lay cables/pipes, treat water, run a coal fired power plant, and lay some concrete. Sure you need some IQ’s pushing 115-120, but there are a billion people in Africa. That means they have 40 million people that are smart enough to do what needs to be done.

          • IstvanIN

            And the 40 million who are smart enough have either been killed for being “too white”, left or are cheating the other 900 million.

          • Black Swan

            Don’t think so. SA still counts on its white component to keep the lights on and uphold a semblance of civilization.

          • kikz2

            but first of all, they’d have to ‘care’.. about the other, the rest, the commons, for infrastructure to be a priority in their ‘civilizations’…… if that faculty isn’t inherent within the population, where/how do you suppose it is to be instilled?

          • Geo1metric

            So, where is the civilization in sub-Saharan Africa?

          • willbest

            I was only making the point that they had the human capital necessary to run a 1980’s civilization. I fully admitted that they don’t have the culture in place to do so. Case in point, the black population in the US was making steady progress prior to the 1960’s when they were forced to rely on themselves, and expected to behave a certain way.

        • Whiteplight

          White Nerds in spacesuits, the original “Moonwalkers.”

      • IstvanIN

        They couldn’t maintain the 1890s level of technology without our help. The basic telegraph, telephone, electric grid and gas lighting are all beyond them. In their natural state they are not as advanced as Whites were in the 1600s. They don’t have the sense to build an outhouse they throw their waste in the streets and on the beeches. Their are beeches that can not be used because that is where they poop. Dig a whole? Requires voodoo!

        • PvtCharlieSlate

          I remember reading recently that there is a growing problem in cities in South Africa where the sewage treatment systems are breaking down and contaminating the water supplies because the blacks who are “running” them are incapable of performing the necessary regular maintenance.

  • Bon, From the Land of Babble

    Well, if blacks and Mexicans want to attend college, all they have to do is get arrested and then incarcerated in the state of New York because Cuomo says all prisoners should get a FREE college education while in prison.

    New York’s prison system is 85% black and brown, doesn’t use racist AA that locks out deserving blacks and the only requirement for admission is to get yourself incarcerated which shouldn’t be too difficult

    Problem solved.

    Gov. Cuomo Announces State Funding for College Education in Prison

    New York’s Governor Andrew Cuomo recently announced that NYS will fund college for prisoners. He hopes that this will give those serving time in prison an opportunity to obtain a college degree which in turn will help end the cycle of recidivism. According to Cuomo since 2007, the NYS Department of Corrections has partnered with colleges including Cornell University and Bard to offer privately funded degree programs at 22 prisons. The newly proposed program will expand on that.

    http //www huffingtonpost com/anthony-papa/gov-cuomo-announces-fundi_b_4799784 html

  • Samuel_Morton

    Sotomayor has the audacity to say she wants open and candid talk about race, while completely ignoring obvious biological foundations for racial differences in IQ and achievement, and at the same time conjuring up fairy tales about how people’s failures are a result of how their ancestors were treated 150 years ago.

    • MikeofAges

      The law, even under the 14th Amendment, does not have to address this issue at all. It merely means that equal treatment is required under whatever policies you establish. It may mean that you can manipulate policies to produce a particular outcome either.

    • MooTieFighter

      They never want a real “open and candid talk”. What they want is to cry “victim” and “racism” to receive even more special treatment and financial assistance. It’s just become old and is not benefiting our country, at all.

  • So CAL Snowman

    ““The Constitution does not protect racial minorities from political
    defeat,” she wrote. “But neither does it give the majority free rein to
    erect selective barriers against racial minorities.” Justice Ruth Bader
    Ginsburg joined the dissent.”

    The Constitution was not meant for non – Whites. The Constitution only applies to the progeny of the Founding Fathers. The Constitution allows for restrictive covenants, I would say that falls under the freedom of the White majority to erect whatever barriers of separation they want against non – White minorities.

    • Bon, From the Land of Babble

      “The U.S. Supreme Court upheld Michigan’s controversial Constitutional ban on Affirmative action.”

  • bubo

    What better way to right those terrible wrongs of centuries past than wholesale discrimination against white teenagers and job seekers. Truly a noble exercise in atonement.

    This is the main foundation of the democrat party. This is why unmarried white females and colored peoples vote for them.

  • Einsatzgrenadier

    Affirmative action is reverse discrimination against whites in favor of undeserving non-whites. The policy should be done away with and non-whites, especially blacks and browns, forced to get by on their own merit. Let the non-whites actually earn those jobs, promotions and big paychecks for a change, instead of allowing the federal government to artificially prop up the non-white middle and upper classes.

    • willbest

      It doesn’t matter, it has been demonstrated that CA administrators try their damnedest to discriminate against whites anyway.

    • Geo1metric

      I never use the phrase “reverse discrimination” when discussing affirmative action; it is discrimination against Whites pure and simple.

      When I am talking to a supporter of affirmative action, I ask them why they support discrimination against Whites.

      • Kenner

        I point out it hurts the least powerful, the lower middle and working class whites, the most.

        • Geo1metric

          Excellent point. I will adopt that as well.

      • Black Swan

        Important point: Discrimination is discrimination, there is no such thing as “reverse” discrimination.
        I call it anti-White discrimination to specify Whites, the people who are undeniably THE most discriminated against population in the entire U.S.

      • MikeofAges

        You may not know it, but reverse discrimination is a legal term, not a colloquialism.

        • Geo1metric

          Thanks for the information. I did not know it.

          Nevertheless, I will still point out the obvious.

          • MikeofAges

            Probably? That’s exactly what it means. It’s the application of anti-trust law to race relations and anti-discrimination enforcement. Whites are the monopoly entity. Whites, therefore, white men, but even juveniles too, are subject to depredations no one else is or can be subject to. Not theoretical. The law.

          • Geo1metric

            Yes, probably. Since I am not familiar with this area of the law, my response was simply reasonable speculation.

            “Not theoretical. The law.” In this case, I say, to quote a familiar statement, “the law is an ass.”

          • MikeofAges

            Yes, that is true. But the law is the law, also. Especially, it is essential to those who are part of the legal system. judges and lawyers, that the law be the law. No exceptions, once you are involved in a legal action, civil or criminal.

          • Geo1metric

            “But the law is the law, also. ”

            Except when petit juries nullify the law.

          • MikeofAges

            That’s not a problem the legal profession. As far as they’re concerned, the jury system exists to protect them from us, not us from them. Once you have a jury verdict, they are allowed to hide behind the verdict and refuse to correct even extreme errors. If they took the view that the jury system existed to protect us from them, they would not have the privilege of hiding behind the jury verdict. They would have to be courageous and forthright in correcting the mistakes of jurors, who might be acting from less than complete information, might suffer from limited mental capacity, might suffer from fear of making a mistake, or might just be going along so they can get home for dinner on time.

          • Thanks, Mike, for the information. We get carried away with identifying the law with what is just.
            Who determines if the law is just? Lawyers and judges? That’s like having the law determine if the law is just. But that would be circular.
            The official goal of the law is justice. As a society gets more messed up in all kinds of ways, the goal itself gets more confused and hopeless.

          • MikeofAges

            The way I put it, we have moved from the rule of law to the rule of lawyers. Not a good thing.

          • Geo1metric

            Go online and read about “The Fully Informed Jury Association”.

  • willbest

    Well that answers that question of whether Sotomayor was more Hispanic or more Woman. She is more Hispanic. Women account for 60% of college applicants and thus could only be harmed by administrators that favor population normalization in admittance.

  • NoMosqueHere

    Texas, Florida and California are actual or de facto majority minority states, so the victory here will be short lived at best.

    • Diversity Fatigue

      True. They are just taking baby steps toward the correct and final decision that makes racial discrimination against whites illegal.

      • Black Swan

        One more marxist appointment should do it. Kagan…Sotomayor…

        SCOTUS is hanging on by a thread.

        • NoMosqueHere

          That’s why I usually vote republican even if the candidate isn’t great.

        • NoMosqueHere

          Right. If Hillary gets in, as everyone seems to expect, she will replace Scalia and possibly Kennedy or Thomas.

          • Well then, the GOP needs to come up with a non-RINO, because if they nominate Jeb Bush, I will vote for Shrillary.

  • Geo1metric

    As I have stated on this site before, I ALWAYS ask my alma maters and politicians who ask for contributions if they support affirmative actions. When they enthusiastically say “yes we do”, I tell them that I do NOT support discrimination against Whites, and decline to give them money on that basis.

    I have been doing this for years as one White man who suffered during my career directly as a result of aa.

  • RisingReich

    Wise Latrina ain’t so wise eh?
    Kiss my rear you squatty Marxist!

  • Geo1metric

    No.

  • Well, hallelujah. The Supreme Court acted within its proper powers and upheld American principles.

  • Eagle_Eyed

    Notice how this case isn’t described as “landmark” or “historic” but rather “fractured” and “deeply divided.”

    The fact that both the Latina and the older Jew (the younger one had to recuse herself) voted against the people shows the current model of letting nine black robes decide important public policy issues is insane. No where in US law is either the federal or state government compelled to improve the status of minority groups, yet this was the main rationale they gave in the dissent. Until justices are held accountable for this blatant disregard of the law (through impeachment), or Congress and the states begin ignoring erroneous court-decisions, these rare minor victories are all we’ll get.

  • FozzieT

    I wonder if the statute of limitations on the “turbul legacy ob slabery” is running out. It has been over 150 years since we freed the slaves, and over 50 years that we have been pouring money and special benefits into the black community. And they’re still as backwards and uncivilized as ever.

    I think more and more, the patience of Whites is running out. The straw that broke the camel’s back is the fact that we elected a Black president, and the cries of “racism” have only grown louder. Enough.

    • Katherine McChesney

      “the fact that we elected a Black president”

      He’s NOT black and he was NOT elected. Voter fraud put him in the White House.

      • FozzieT

        Well he’s sure not White. But regardless, my point is that Whites have bent over backwards over the past 50 years for this uncivilized, backwards people, and I think the “average” White has had enough. Look at the comments on articles in “mainstream” news sites about “youth” crime. And this Supreme Court 6-2 decision. I believe there is an awakening going on.

        • IstvanIN

          Even if Kaganovich hadn’t recused herself it would have been 6-3!

        • BonV.Vant

          mainstream news sites no longer permit comments because the public sentiment is overwhelming AGAINST the liberal agenda and minorities.

      • IstvanIN

        He is black. Period. If you saw him in the grocer’s or a lineup you would say black.

        • Katherine McChesney

          He’s a Mulatto.

          • IstvanIN

            I am an American and he’s black. We have the one-drop rule and he be a lot more than one drop. He doesn’t even look that mulatto quite frankly.

          • BonV.Vant

            a mulatto is black. IT would take many generations of breeding with whites for the black to be bred out of his line.You are either white, or you are not, there is no such thing as “half white”, half white means BLACK!

          • Einsatzgrenadier

            That reminds me of a passage from Madison Grant’s “The Passing of the Great Race” (1916):

            It must be borne in mind that the specializations which characterize the higher races are of relatively recent development, are highly unstable and when mixed with generalized or primitive characters tend to disappear. Whether we like to admit it or not, the result of the mixture of two races, in the long run, gives us a race reverting to the more ancient, generalized and lower type. The cross between a white man and an Indian is an Indian; the cross between a white man and a Negro is a Negro; the cross between a white man and a Hindu is a Hindu; and the cross between any of the three European races and a Jew is a Jew.

          • Katherine McChesney

            You’ve been brainwashed by the ‘one drop’ black propaganda. And, I suppose you think we all came from Africa.

      • Diversity Fatigue

        He’s black. He has a preponderance of African DNA.

        • Black Swan

          He also has a black African nature.

        • MikeofAges

          Actually not. His mother was as white as you can get and his father probably had some proportion of Arab ancestry, Semitic Caucasian, that is to say.

    • dcc2379

      The legacy of slavery writ large as grievance politics will never run out until whites are eradicated from the Earth, and then we will be living in a nightmare that is reminiscent of The Planet of the Apes.

  • HJ11

    Affirmative action is discrimination against Whites. Period.

    • Pro_Whitey

      Yup. It certainly isn’t discrimination against Asians (how could we let ourselves by foiled by those sneaky Asians? [sarc]), nor does it discriminate against Jews. Non-Jewish whites bear the brunt. And because we know that there never will be the “racial equality” Ginsburg and Sotomayor demand, it will never end otherwise.

  • MooTieFighter

    Amazing!!

  • 1stworlder

    She is lucky she can spell her name. If she checked Asian she would never made it to college.

    • DA

      She is the product of Affirmative Action.

  • MBlanc46

    “She said the initiative put minorities to a burden not faced by other
    college applicants and so violated the Constitution’s equal protection
    clause.”

    I was going to say that she must be ignorant of the equal protection clause. Clearly she’s not ignorant of it. She is aware of it and makes a topsy-turvy perversion of it.

  • MBlanc46

    The mistake Dan made was doing it single-handedly.

    • Kathleen Moore

      You’re right. One man is a madman, a group is a political movement!

  • MekongDelta69

    You have the Constitution, the rule of law, and a once-civil society…

    …And then you have Sonia and Ruthie – and 50 years and $12 Trillion of Rep-a-ma-ray-shuns, playing the race card, savages running wild in the streets, and total discrimination against straight white males.

    NOTHING will EVER change – because you can’t speed up evolution, nor raise IQ.

    • BonV.Vant

      we need to set up “reparation zones” when we retake the country. Minorities who collect welfare can only do so if they are residents of those zones. Then we need to slowly eradicate the do nothing gubmint jobs and the aa positions. Since almost all of the black middle class has one or the other, then sooner or later they all will be in those zones. At some point we restrict travel to and from those zones. We make liberals, democrats and minorities pay a special tax to support those areas, no money no support, too bad.

  • Black Swan

    The fat “wise” lesbotino recused herself from the case.

    • Luca

      I think you meant “lesbotina”.

    • rebelcelt

      I wonder if she would have recused herself if she were white?

  • Black Swan

    The Constitution only works if it’s upheld and respected as the highest law of the land. It’s being shredded daily by the likes of obama and his minions.

    As John Adams said: “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”

    Moral and religious people = White Europeans who respect the Rule of law.

    • r j p

      Black Swan, what do you do that’s an odd name.

      • Black Swan

        A Black Swan is a major, unpredictable, unforeseen event that has a profound, usually worldwide impact, and almost mythological effect on culture, such as 911. At one time, it was thought that black swans didn’t exist, but we do.

        In some mythology, black swans are the keepers of evil, as in “Swan Lake.”

        • r j p

          I know what a Black Swan is, used to be in a profession where the Black Swan might have been a discussion.

          • Geo1metric

            It is also the title of a book which is an excellent read in my opinion.

        • I love the avatar.

  • Petronius

    Great post. Although I believe the Constitution may have died before 1865 — say, on 15 Apr 1861 with Lincoln’s call for troops to invade the South. Or perhaps as early as 1859, with the North’s celebratory response to John Brown’s raid on Harpers Ferry. Or in 1856 with Charles Sumner’s “The Crime Against Kansas” speech, which is sometimes cited as the real start of the Civil War.

  • Black Swan

    When did you first get the hint? Was it when she sided against the White firefighters?

  • OhWow

    Oh the irony. A minority gets a spot in the supreme court from affirmative action then complains minorities aren’t getting enough privilege.

    • DA

      She is a double minded hypocrite.

  • Mrfinoni

    they can’t handle the workload of higher academia any more than I can play in the NBA. people need to know their realistic abilities and limitations. Blacks and Browns are just not that smart. This is not racist people!!!! they have genetically lower IQ’s on average. Much lower than Whites! It comes down to basic intelligence. Even the intelligent Blacks with good jobs have multiple baby mommas, substance abuse issues… chronic debt and more often a terrible work ethic. On the other hand poor Whites, much to the chagrin of the Elite Liberals behave much more civilly, live within their means, have comparatively low crime rates…. etc…etc…etc… they do this because of thousand of years of White evolution. It is Genetic!!!

    • benvad

      They’ll never listen, the truth really does hurt.

  • libertarian1234

    “She wants to correct the “unfortunate effects of centuries of racial discrimination.”
    “Centuries?”

    Here’s another anti-white hater who is livid that “her people” have lagged behind whites for centuries. She wants people to think they would now be the top performers in the country instead of cabbage pickers if it weren’t for “white racism.” She doesn’t give one whit for blacks any more than she does for whites. She wants any kind of system in play that will give privileges to “her people.”

    Her mantra is the same as the black mantra. If it wasn’t for being held back by whitey we would be rocket scientists, Pulitzer Prize winners, great philosophers, etc.

    I’m wondering when she’s going to pop up and say her people built the pyramids right along with the black geniuses.

    • benvad

      She’s dreaming.

  • libertarian1234

    Anybody in her position who says something like that isn’t very wise.
    Actually she’s a grinning buffoon.

  • BonV.Vant

    It is all just a shuck and jive to steal what the white man has made for himself.

  • shmo123

    The ingrate Sotomayor who attended both Princeton and Yale on full scholarship, spent a good deal of her time involved with minority grievance groups who complained of white imperialism, racism, privilege, etc. etc. She apparently hasn’t changed.

    I’m sure she and Ginsburg look real good flying home on their broomsticks at the end of each day.

  • MikeofAges

    The Supreme Court did not end the disparate impact system (aka affirmative action) as it now exists. It merely gave the states and other entities wider discretion in how they implement it

    Whatever racial system has existed in each stage of American history is the system, period. In fact, the successions of racial systems are the eras of American history. Under disparate impact, whites, especially white men and even juveniles, are treated as a monopoly entity subject to sanctions, restriction and punishments just like a monopoly corporation in a particular industry would be following successful court action.

    Until disparate impact is specifically and overtly ended, it will continue to be the system. Under disparate impact, each segment of the population is treated as corporate entity and assigned unique rights and liabilities.

    • Geo1metric

      IOW, so much for “equal protection under the law”.

  • Garrett Brown

    A small victory in a sea of failures. It at least made me happy for the day.

  • benvad

    You’re not bright enough to get in? Get a manual labor job.

    • Ed

      The Spanish people are taking all of them!

      • benvad

        Call yourself Pepe.

  • benvad

    Go to Black colleges, they’re always looking for students.

  • Duke56

    What do you call a med student who graduated at the bottom of his class……… “Doctor”
    What do you call a law student who graduated at the bottom of his class………..

    “Your Honor”

    • PvtCharlieSlate

      The way I heard it is that you call an old, senile lawyer “Your Honor”.

  • Brian

    What she really wants to correct are millennia of human evolution.

  • Who would ever have guessed that a fat, sub-literate, Constitutionally-ignoreant Greaserita appointed by a white-hating, half-Kenyan cultural Marxist would dissent in a case like this?

  • Coral Rose

    Excellent news.

  • BonV.Vant

    All over the country blacks are saying ” awww hell naw! Not whens weebs habs da black prez-eee-dint”

  • 50 years of reverse discrimination enabled by dumbed down intellectual and physical standards AND the threat of whitheld federal funds and a lengthy court battle has cowed many. Copious evidence exists that reveals the erosion of standards – required to keep the second rate replacements in place. Each day I hope those promulgating these backwards and unConstitutional programs are forced to encounter the persons for whom the advocate as firemen, police officers, or another position of responsibility, and they experiences personal losses as a result of the incompetence.

  • Pro_Whitey

    The affirmative action policy was first instituted by the Michigan govt, supposedly controlled by white people, yet the vote of the people of Michigan to undo the policy is now unconstitutional. So is it that the constitution is a one-way street, you can start these things but not stop them? Sotomayor and Ginsburg are full of excrement. The real principle is, as the Declaration of Independence puts it, that a government derives its just powers from the consent of the people. The people determine rights and obligations by consensus and at times through their representatives. The left wants th epeople to cede this power to them to exercise at their whim. Intercourse that excrement!

  • Pro_Whitey

    I think she says, Yo soy el constitucion, bitch! Good for the rest of the Supremes, except Ginsburg, that she did not get her way. As for Ginsburg, her legal standard is, Le constitution, c’est moi!

  • Hubbub

    Sotomayor: The way to stop racial discrimination against one group is to foist it off onto another group. This way we can keep the fires of discrimination lit and burning bright for generation upon generation. I am a wise Latina, let me tell you, again and again.

  • Alec Smart

    Sotomayor isn’t even an American.

  • jim b

    So…..The only way to combat discrimination is to…..discriminate. I think I get it!

  • WR_the_realist

    So Latinos like Sotomayor must be given affirmative action because of long gone slavery of blacks. The workings of the progressive mind are frightening to behold.

    Affirmative action should have been found outright unconstitutional by the Supreme Court long ago as a clear violation of the equal protection clause.

  • Stan D Mute

    The next play in Michigan will be eliminating the ACT & SAT as qualifiers for admission. If they use only essay and GPA, they can admit as many diversities as they like. GPA of course is meaningless without objective comparison (ie 4.0 at Bloomfield Hills vs 4.0 at Detroit Mumford) and essays quickly identify the diversities they wish to admit. Continued attempts to revise ACT & SAT tests to eliminate the wide racial gap will fail without radical restructuring (ie “if Quanisha have sebben baby daddy an foteen babies, how much welfare do she gets” or “if D’Felny be slangin rocks all day, how many Jordans do he be wearin”).

    The cultural Marxists can NEVER admit (openly) the reality of race and genetically controlled potential. Yet they must ALWAYS support policy that is only logically supportable by such realism. Africans DO need major race based preferences to have a shot at what average whites, Asians, or Jews take for granted. Until gene modification is a reality, this will remain the case. So the leftists will tell any lie to avoid the truth of the matter.

  • DA

    she is neither “wise” or a real Latin. She is a dimwitted Hispanic.

    • MarcB1969

      There is a large swath of the Western Hemisphere misusing the term Latin. Thanks for pointing that out.

  • dcc2379

    “But neither does it give the majority free rein to erect selective barriers against racial minorities.”

    The selective barriers are that each group is graded according to the content of their character and not the color of their skin. What are the selective barriers against people that are not white? They all have to be treated equally. Liberals hijack terms and make them say things that only an academician could derive. William F. Buckley, Jr. was on to something when he stated: “I’d rather entrust the government of the United States to the first 400 people listed in the Boston telephone directory than to the faculty of Harvard University.”

  • John R

    So, now not discriminating enough in favor of blacks is the same as discriminating against blacks, and color blind admissions decisions are an example of racial discrimination. Ah, the world we live in.

  • Geo1metric

    Yes, I’ve noticed that; it is part and parcel of the “divide and conquer” strategy.

    Since the beginning of AA, White men have been the new ni**er in America.

    When you consider that, it hasn’t been good for White women either, at least for the ones loyal to our race.

  • DudeWheresMyCountry?

    What I love about Sotomayor is that she exposes the ridiculousness of AA every time she opens her gullet. It shows people on a subconscious level that the best and brightest of non-Whites just simply isn’t that bright. She is the best they can come up with. She even heralds herself as wise. The narcissism of non-Whites always amuses and disturbs me. Her very existence as a SCJ is proof that non-Whites can never compete fairly for top positions and that they will always seek to discriminate in order to get where they can’t get on merit.

  • Greg Thomas

    The “wise latina” is nothing more than a street activist, who despises our Constitution and wants it replaced with affirmative action and set asides for all members of diversity. Of course, this is all done under the guise of “special vigilance in light of the history of slavery, Jim Crow and “recent examples of discriminatory changes to state voting laws.”

    The “wise latina” actually believes that showing a government issued identification, in order to participate in the political process, amounts to “discrimination” against members of diversity.This woman should be sitting in some municipal court, presiding over those contesting parking citations.

  • “The news did not explain Dan’s motive.”
    Oh, those rotten newspapers.

  • Duke56

    “Whites and Asians against Blacks and Hispanics”… based on history, messing with Whites and Asians isn’t really the way to go.

  • David Weeks

    The worst “unfortunate effect” of slavery is the damage affirmative action programs and other government “great society” welfare programs caused to black culture in America. Generations of welfare, undeserved social promotion in schools, and affirmative action hiring, has resulted in severe damage to the very people that it was supposedly helping. Hard work, pride in accomplishment, and family values has largely vanished in the black community. It has largely been replaced by an entitlement oriented bitter attitude that benefits nobody.
    The election of Barack Obama is certainly the most egregious example of the folly of affirmative action. He is totally lacking in any job experience that would have qualified him for the presidency. He refuses to release his college records, leading to the obvious conclusion that he was either a lousy student, or somebody paid for his schooling that he does not want to reveal. He associated with known communists and terrorists. His preacher was a racist. Now we are suffering the consequences of having such an unqualified person leading this once great nation.

  • Don’t try to assign much in the way of rhyme or reason or method to the madness of the Roberts court. It’ll only drive you crazy.

    I don’t think they’re trying to poke Obama in the eye, because not all of their decisions since Obama has been in office have done that. Also don’t forget that the McDonald decision was two years after the Heller decision, and that happened while Bush was still President. The same SCOTUS (essentially, by the time they did McDonald, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan were two ideological drop-in replacements for their predecessors), that decided the way it did in Heller were obviously going to almost the same ruling in almost the same legal question in Heller.

    Yeah, the ones that ruled in the majority on Citizens United are probably steaming for the way Obama publicly pantsed them in that one SOTU, but I don’t think they’re the kind of people who would exact revenge by deciding any differently on legal matters than they otherwise would just to settle a personal score.

  • IstvanIN

    Fat lot of good it did.