sassa Posted June 23 Report Share Posted June 23 US Supreme Court upholds affirmative action --------------------------------------------------------------------------------Xinhuanet 2003-06-24 02:07:59 WASHINGTON, June 23 (Xinhuanet) -- The United States Supreme Court preserved narrow use of affirmative action in university admissions in two separate rulings Monday. The top court ruled that the University of Michigan's law school policy, which considered race as a factor in admissions but did not assign specific weight to it, did not violate the equal protections law, while the undergraduate policy did. The court, by a vote of 5-4, upheld the university's affirmative action policy that minority applicants may be given an edge in university admissions. Meanwhile, with a 6-3 vote, the court struck down a point system used by the University of Michigan's undergraduate programs which gives minority applicants a 20-point boost. "This is a wonderful, wonderful day -- a victory for all of higher education, because what it means at its core is that affirmative action may still be used and the court's given us a road map to get there," said University of Michigan President Mary Sue Coleman. The court also "gave us a road map for changing our undergraduate system," she added. "The central principle is that affirmative action may be used -- and that's what we were fighting for." The University of Michigan cases were the most significant test of affirmative action to reach the court in a generation. At issue was whether racial preference programs unconstitutionally discriminate against white students. Michigan's undergraduate school used a 150-point index to screen applicants. The 20 points awarded to minorities was more than the school awarded for some measures of academic excellence, writing ability or other skills. Two white plaintiffs, Jennifer Gratz and Patrick Hamacher, were Michigan residents with good grades and other qualifications, but their applications were rejected by the University of Michigan in 1997. The two sued the university, claiming that the university's policies violated constitutional equality guarantees by discriminating against them. Monday's ruling could determine the fate of similar affirmative action programs that help minorities gain admission to universities throughout the country. Affirmative action programs were created to correct racial and cultural discrimination, dating from the days of slavery and public segregation. Advocates on both sides agree that the initiatives have proven controversial, and enforcement has often been random and confusing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hotbarbiedoll Posted June 24 Report Share Posted June 24 They have ruled against affirmative action...But what I find so ironic is how Clarence Thomas, the Supreme Court Justice, feels that quotas should not exist because its unconstitutional, yet he's black. Oh boy, Bush made the right decision when he nominated him - he officially became Bush's puppet Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
t0nythelover Posted June 24 Report Share Posted June 24 just because clarence thomas is black doesnt mean he got where he is by affimative action. maybe he was always down with uncle tom's cabinet and didnt have to use it.this ruling is exactly what i thought would happen. quotas and point systems violate the law...but what is the proper legal way to do it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hotbarbiedoll Posted June 24 Report Share Posted June 24 Im not saying he got where he is by affirmative action.-He attended Yale or Harvard( I forgot which one ) so obviously he had the right essentials. My point was that Bush has his ways to manipulate every aspect that he wishes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
£ddie Posted June 24 Report Share Posted June 24 Originally posted by t0nythelover just because clarence thomas is black doesnt mean he got where he is by affimative action. maybe he was always down with uncle tom's cabinet and didnt have to use it. He was accepted into Yale as part of Yale's affirmative action program. You have to be a great student regardless to get into Yale, but he probably would not have gotten into Yale without affirmative action. He's written about the fact that it bothered him that he was a beneficiary of affirmative action. He wrote how it disturbed him that people would assume you were dumb and you had to prove yourself because people assumed you were there not based on merit. It is ironic though that probably the most notable beneficiary of affirmative action is now dead set against it. Biting the hand that fed you . . . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sassa Posted June 24 Author Report Share Posted June 24 Originally posted by £ddie He was accepted into Yale as part of Yale's affirmative action program. You have to be a great student regardless to get into Yale, but he probably would not have gotten into Yale without affirmative action. He's written about the fact that it bothered him that he was a beneficiary of affirmative action. He wrote how it disturbed him that people would assume you were dumb and you had to prove yourself because people assumed you were there not based on merit. It is ironic though that probably the most notable beneficiary of affirmative action is now dead set against it. Biting the hand that fed you . . . i guess they skipped bush for this exam... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr mahs Posted June 24 Report Share Posted June 24 Affrimative action is racism at the fullest. In todays age with black CEO's and powerful buisness moguls this curve minorities receive to offset being lazy is lunacy... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
£ddie Posted June 24 Report Share Posted June 24 Originally posted by mr mahs Affrimative action is racism at the fullest. In todays age with black CEO's and powerful buisness moguls this curve minorities receive to offset being lazy is lunacy... I don't agree with affirmative action but think if it's abolished, there should be a level playing field, period. Meaning, no one gets into an academic institution just because they're the Dean's daughter's best friend etc. or because their daddy is a big donor to the school. (not likely to happen) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hotbarbiedoll Posted June 24 Report Share Posted June 24 Originally posted by £ddie Biting the hand that fed you . . . Exactly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
t0nythelover Posted June 24 Report Share Posted June 24 Originally posted by £ddie I don't agree with affirmative action but think if it's abolished, there should be a level playing field, period. Meaning, no one gets into an academic institution just because they're the Dean's daughter's best friend etc. or because their daddy is a big donor to the school. (not likely to happen) that would be the case in a perfect world.mahs-affirmative action was not implemented to ease in laziness. in the 60's blacks didnt go to school and get jobs because it was illegal for them to, not because they were lazy. theres still hardcore discrimination these days, but i dont think its so much black and white as it is about the green. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr mahs Posted June 24 Report Share Posted June 24 Originally posted by t0nythelover that would be the case in a perfect world.mahs-affirmative action was not implemented to ease in laziness. in the 60's blacks didnt go to school and get jobs because it was illegal for them to, not because they were lazy. theres still hardcore discrimination these days, but i dont think its so much black and white as it is about the green. Granted in the 60's it was warranted but today NO... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skince55 Posted June 24 Report Share Posted June 24 Originally posted by t0nythelover that would be the case in a perfect world.mahs-affirmative action was not implemented to ease in laziness. in the 60's blacks didnt go to school and get jobs because it was illegal for them to, not because they were lazy. theres still hardcore discrimination these days, but i dont think its so much black and white as it is about the green. If they wanted to keep some kind of affirmative action it should be based on class as opposed race.(Which would favor minorities). Maybe the standards should be lower for someone who was brought up with lower standards this way they are given the same chance to succeed as the middle and upperclass people. It definately shouldn't be based on race though, because then you have the middle and upperclass blacks who would have been given every opportunity that whites have had and yet they still recieve special treatment(which would based strictly on race as opposed to need). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr mahs Posted June 24 Report Share Posted June 24 Originally posted by skince55 If they wanted to keep some kind of affirmative action it should be based on class as opposed race.(Which would favor minorities). Maybe the standards should be lower for someone who was brought up with lower standards this way they are given the same chance to succeed as the middle and upperclass people. It definately shouldn't be based on race though, because then you have the middle and upperclass blacks who would have been given every opportunity that whites have had and yet they still recieve special treatment(which would based strictly on race as opposed to need). Good point, I agree Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaysersoze Posted June 25 Report Share Posted June 25 good point arguments from all ends.... 30 years ago, there's no way this was a discussion agenda...we've come a long way guys.... keep it up. i still have hope that we live in the best human domain ever known 2 man.its turned out to be a reality,...we disagree to agree on issues..equal ops 2 all.sorry peeps, but i still cant stand party boy 'bush'.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
normalnoises Posted June 25 Report Share Posted June 25 Originally posted by mr mahs Affrimative action is racism at the fullest. In todays age with black CEO's and powerful buisness moguls this curve minorities receive to offset being lazy is lunacy... It's reverse-discrimination. That's why I oppose affirmative action. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.