Opinion | Supreme Court’s affirmative action decision confirms what we already knew, and feared

. That federal law prohibits private entities, like colleges, that receive federal government funds from discriminating on the basis of race. Similar to its reasoning in the UNC case, in the Harvard case, the court concluded that race-conscious admissions policies constitute racial discrimination., “I’ve heard the word ‘diversity’ quite a few times, and I don’t have a clue what it means.

But for this court, even decisions by Republican-appointed justices like O’Connor stand in the way of their desire to remake our society in their vision. In 2003, the court recognized that “ use of admissions decisions [could] further a compelling interest in obtaining the educational benefits that flow from a diverse student body

.” In the Supreme Court’s new world order, achieving a racially diverse student body is no longer a compelling government interest. In fact, using race-conscious criteria in admissions decisions to achieve racial diversity now violates both the United States Constitution and federal statutory law. This court will continue to steamroll through its past decisions where they stand as inconvenient roadblocks to its policy goals. It didn’t start with abortion and it won’t end with affirmative action.

Law Law Latest News, Law Law Headlines

Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.

Supreme Court says state courts can review election law, rejects independent state legislator theoryThe Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that state legislators are not the ultimate authority on how elections are conducted, reasoning that state courts can review election rules enacted by lawmakers.
Source: WashTimes - 🏆 235. / 63 Read more »

Supreme Court rules state courts can play role in policing federal electionsBREAKING: The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that North Carolina’s top court did not overstep its bounds in striking down a congressional districting plan. The case would have left state legislatures virtually unchecked in making rules for federal elections.
Source: AP - 🏆 728. / 51 Read more »

Supreme Court Upholds State Courts’ Power to Prevent GerrymandersThe Supreme Court said legislatures drawing congressional districts are bound by election protections in state constitutions, dealing a blow to GOP aspirations to sideline state courts from overseeing federal elections
Source: WSJ - 🏆 98. / 63 Read more »

Supreme Court rules state courts can play role in policing federal electionsThe Supreme Court on Tuesday ruled that North Carolina’s top court did not overstep its bounds in striking down a congressional districting plan as excessively partisan under state law.
Source: ChicagoBreaking - 🏆 521. / 51 Read more »

Supreme Court Gives State Courts More Power Over Corporate DefendantsThe Supreme Court rejected a bid by Norfolk Southern to limit its state-court liability in states where it does relatively little business
Source: WSJ - 🏆 98. / 63 Read more »