Tndeer Logo

Page 1 of 1 1
Topic Options
#3403308 - 10/15/13 10:30 AM Equal treatment......is racist
preds1
12 Point


Registered: 10/16/09
Posts: 6234
Loc: Sumner County

Offline
Thousands are expected to gather outside Tuesday as the U.S. Supreme Court takes up oral arguments over Michigan’s affirmative action ban, in what court watchers nationally are calling one of the most important cases on the docket this fall.

The case centers on Proposal 2, a 2006 voter-passed initiative banning the use of race in public settings, including in admission decisions at Michigan’s public universities.

A decision isn’t likely to come for months, but when it does, it will have far-reaching implications. If the court upholds the initiative, the debate over affirmative action in Michigan will be effectively dead, and efforts to ban it in other states can get started. If the court overturns the ban, the use of affirmative action in admissions decisions at Michigan’s public universities and in six other states will be restored.

The seven-years-long legal battle is likely to come down to U.S. Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy, widely believed to be the swing vote — and the justice’s supporters and opponents will be watching closely when they pack the courtroom Tuesday.

Three justices are all but guaranteed to vote for overthrowing the law, and four are likely to favor keeping it. Justice Elena Kagan recused herself from the case, but didn’t cite a reason.

Court-watchers are putting the odds at a 5-3 vote, with Kennedy likely to rule in favor of keeping Proposal 2, also known as the Michigan Civil Rights Initiative.

The best outcome affirmative action proponents likely can hope for from the high court is a split 4-4 vote, if Kennedy votes in their favor, court watchers say. A tie vote would leave in place a lower court ruling that threw out Michigan’s ban on the use of affirmative action in university admissions, but it would be a less than decisive victory.

The law, which remains in place, was challenged shortly after voters approved it. A coalition of forces opposed to it won a key victory last November when a federal appeals court threw out Proposal 2. Michigan Attorney General Bill Schuette filed an appeal with the Supreme Court immediately; it will hear the case at 1:30 p.m. Tuesday.

Fewer black students

In the fall of 2005, 2,618 of the 39,993 students on the University of Michigan’s Ann Arbor campus were black. That’s 6.5% of all students.

In the fall of 2012 — the latest year for which figures are available —1,780 of the 43,426 students on U-M’s campus were black. That’s 4.74%.

The 32% decline in the total number of black students, even while the university overall is growing, is exactly what’s wrong with Proposal 2, according to those trying to get it overturned. They say the law hurt minority students by denying them the ability to petition for special consideration during the admissions process, which they say violates the U.S. Constitution’s equal protection clause.

“The regents (of U-M) and the boards at Wayne State and Michigan State have complete power over everything that goes on there,” said Detroit attorney George Washington, who will argue the anti-Proposal 2 group’s side in the case. “They’ve always set the admission policies for the universities. This takes that power away from them and tells (minorities) that everybody else in the state can (argue for changes to the policies), but you can’t go in there and argue.”

Various groups have lobbied boards for changes to admission policies over the years, including a group that pushed U-M regents recently to change who qualifies for in-state tuition to allow some undocumented students to do so.

Schuette told the Free Press there’s nothing more equal than equality.

“Our (Michigan) Constitution says we require equal treatment under the law. It’s fundamentally wrong to treat people differently based on the color of their skin. I believe that we will win (because) equal treatment in Michigan’s constitution is consistent with equal protection in the U.S. Constitution.”

'It will be upheld'

The shaking of Jennifer Gratz’s head is nearly audible over the phone as she’s asked what will happen if she and her pro-Proposal 2 allies win at the Supreme Court.

“It’s not if we win,” she said. “It’s when we win. I don’t have a doubt that it will be upheld.”

And when it is upheld, Gratz said, the ruling is likely to strengthen those fighting against affirmative action policies across the country.

She was a lead plaintiff in the original Supreme Court case regarding the U-M’s admission policies, a case that was decided in 2003. After that case, Gratz helped get Proposal 2 passed and now runs a nonprofit organization fighting to end affirmative action.

Still, she doesn’t see a decision in her favor as being the final arbiter on affirmative action in Michigan. She said “those who buy into racial preferences” aren’t going to give up.

“I think there will still be challenges, but those will really be going against established laws and court decisions,” she said.

Washington, the attorney for the anti-Proposal 2 side, thinks a loss for his side would be devastating.

“I think it would put a real damper” on affirmative action, he said. “If we were to lose, we would have status quo. I think other laws like this one would be passed in other states.”

Mark Rosenbaum, the attorney arguing against Proposal 2 for the American Civil Liberties Union, agrees with Washington.

“The door will be open for other states to follow what Michigan and California did,” he said.

Despite experts’ opinion that he faces an uphill battle, Washington is convinced he’ll win. And when he does, it would “reinvigorate” those who support affirmative action, he said.

Both sides believe that if Proposal 2 is overturned, Michigan residents should get used to reading about court proceedings.

“There will be challenge after challenge,” Gratz said.

That’s the history of the debate about affirmative action in Michigan — the issue has been tied up in litigation almost constantly since 1997.

Conflicting rulings

Proposal 2 supporters thought they were never going to have to go to the Supreme Court with this case.

Before the U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals overturned Proposal 2, there wasn’t any “question on the constitutionality of Prop 2 and similar laws,” said Philip Pucillo, a lecturer at Michigan State University’s law school and a constitutional law scholar.

But once the 6th Circuit ruled, there was little doubt the Supreme Court would get the case. That’s because a 9th Circuit ruling takes the opposite point of view from the 6th Circuit, setting up a conflict. It’s the Supreme Court’s job to sort out those conflicting judgments.

Tuesday’s arguments will take place in front of a conservative court, and that bodes well for Proposal 2 supporters.

“You’ll probably still have the same party-line vote you normally have in racial discrimination cases,” Pucillo said. “You can already hear the opinions of the justices saying what’s more equal than taking race completely off the table. I think they (the high court) will just flat overrule the lower court.”

The swing vote, as it is in most divided cases these days, is likely to be Kennedy, who was appointed by President Ronald Reagan.

“He hasn’t been very friendly to affirmative action policies,” Pucillo said.

But Bret Boyce, a University of Detroit Mercy law school professor and court expert, said Kennedy isn’t an automatic vote.

“He has been willing to see limited use of affirmative action,” Boyce said.

There’s a chance for a sweeping victory for Proposal 2 supporters, Boyce said.

“I would not rule out the possibility that some or all of the ‘liberal’ justices might also join them as well. Notably, Justice Breyer concurred in the judgment striking down the U-M undergraduate affirmative action in Gratz. And even Justices Ginsburg and Sotomayor, who are generally strong supporters of the idea that affirmative action programs are permissible, may balk at endorsing the convoluted reasoning of the 6th Circuit that such programs cannot be ended by referendum. Ultimately, the larger the majority for reversal, the narrower I would expect the scope of the opinion to be, in order to get as many justices as possible to sign on.”

No matter the scope of the ruling, Schuette says he believes this case is significant.

“I think this case starts an important conversation about race and college admissions. For too long we’ve had an insufficient discussion about race and urban education. Our schools are failing students. We need to have a discussion on race, diversity and how you fix urban schools. That’s the subtext of this case.”

http://www.freep.com/article/20131013/NE...ill-eye-Kennedy
_________________________

http://youtu.be/pqICP295APA

Top
#3403748 - 10/15/13 03:51 PM Re: Equal treatment......is racist [Re: preds1]
VolHunter22
4 Point


Registered: 05/07/13
Posts: 217
Loc: Knox, TN and Cordova, TN

Offline
How does the ability to keep people from applying for "special consideration" because of race deny anyone "equal protection"? I don't understand the logic here. Seems black and white.

Edited by Mdavis71 (10/15/13 05:33 PM)

Top
#3403949 - 10/15/13 06:31 PM Re: Equal treatment......is racist [Re: VolHunter22]
Still-n-Quiet
10 Point


Registered: 07/18/06
Posts: 4849
Loc: San Antonio, TX

Offline
 Originally Posted By: Mdavis71
Seems black and white.




\:D
_________________________
Mike

Searching for the elusive "Moderate" liberal and "Moderate" Muslim. Maybe they are hiding together...

Μολων λαβε

Top
#3404190 - 10/15/13 08:45 PM Re: Equal treatment......is racist [Re: Still-n-Quiet]
de novo
10 Point


Registered: 07/21/08
Posts: 4029
Loc: Middle TN

Offline
Affirmative action, diversity, multicultural, minorities, etc. are all code words for anti-white! That's all they mean.
_________________________
“Reality is what continues to exist whether you believe in it or not.” 

“The further a society drifts from truth the more it will hate those who speak it.”

Top
#3404278 - 10/15/13 10:04 PM Re: Equal treatment......is racist [Re: de novo]
VolHunter22
4 Point


Registered: 05/07/13
Posts: 217
Loc: Knox, TN and Cordova, TN

Offline
I mean, maybe affirmative action had it's place in the 60s, but I feel like we've come a long way from the civil rights movement. You get into college based on merit, not race.
Top
#3404359 - 10/15/13 11:15 PM Re: Equal treatment......is racist [Re: VolHunter22]
FLTENNHUNTER1
16 Point


Registered: 11/21/07
Posts: 16045
Loc: Tampa FL

Offline
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."

Unless of course, you were created white.
_________________________
The Second Amendment - George Washington didn't use free speech to defeat the British, he shot them.
"If there must be trouble, let it be in my day, that my child may have peace." - Thomas Paine





Top
#3404443 - 10/16/13 05:30 AM Re: Equal treatment......is racist [Re: FLTENNHUNTER1]
Crappie Luck Moderator
Non-Typical


Registered: 01/29/03
Posts: 60812
Loc: Smith Co.

Offline
Affirmative action was originally designed to prevent exactly what is happening. It was written to remove any racial bias in hiring. Bow it's used to justify it.

Once again the Democrats are pushing Jim Crow laws. They just changed the wording from "You MUST use the black only water fountain" to "You DESERVE a black only water fountain" They'll toss around the "Past racism of the South" as a justification for their actions. All the while doing interviews on BET, Ebony Mag and to the Black Only Congressional Caucus.

Institutionalized racism is still just racism.
_________________________
"To find out who your real rulers are, simply look to those whom you CANNOT criticize..."
--Voltaire

Top
#3404687 - 10/16/13 09:04 AM Re: Equal treatment......is racist [Re: Crappie Luck]
de novo
10 Point


Registered: 07/21/08
Posts: 4029
Loc: Middle TN

Offline
 Originally Posted By: Crappie Luck
Affirmative action was originally designed to prevent exactly what is happening. It was written to remove any racial bias in hiring. Bow it's used to justify it.


Wow, a federal law can have unintended harmful consequences? How can that happen?
_________________________
“Reality is what continues to exist whether you believe in it or not.” 

“The further a society drifts from truth the more it will hate those who speak it.”

Top
#3404749 - 10/16/13 09:38 AM Re: Equal treatment......is racist [Re: de novo]
Still-n-Quiet
10 Point


Registered: 07/18/06
Posts: 4849
Loc: San Antonio, TX

Offline
 Originally Posted By: de novo
 Originally Posted By: Crappie Luck
Affirmative action was originally designed to prevent exactly what is happening. It was written to remove any racial bias in hiring. Bow it's used to justify it.


Wow, a federal law can have unintended harmful consequences? How can that happen?




This is, ultimately, the major problem with liberals. They never seem to work through the unintended consequences. They are too blinded by emotion to think it through.
_________________________
Mike

Searching for the elusive "Moderate" liberal and "Moderate" Muslim. Maybe they are hiding together...

Μολων λαβε

Top
#3404772 - 10/16/13 09:57 AM Re: Equal treatment......is racist [Re: Still-n-Quiet]
Crappie Luck Moderator
Non-Typical


Registered: 01/29/03
Posts: 60812
Loc: Smith Co.

Offline
But it is not unintended. It is the agenda behind the perpetuation of white guilt and and the reparations for perceived past grievances.

The white man is the devil of slavery. Forget the fact that it was under the flag of Britain and many of the slave traders were black themselves.

Revisionist history is not blind. It is a quest for Black Supremacists.
_________________________
"To find out who your real rulers are, simply look to those whom you CANNOT criticize..."
--Voltaire

Top
Page 1 of 1 1


Moderator:  Crappie Luck, Tennessee Todd, RUGER, Unicam, stretch, Cuttin Caller, Bobby G, Kimber45 
Hop to:
Top Posters
4105158
RUGER
86603
Deer Assassin
64982
BSK
60812
Crappie Luck
51376
spitndrum
Newest Members
bootsinsand, bigun714, clh200, tlwilliams, Forvols
13179 Registered Users
Who's Online
13 registered (ZachMarkus, Paul Burns, Countryboy0626, missalot, arctic_cat, mossyoakmantn, 1 invisible) and 52 anonymous users online.
Forum Stats
13179 Members
42 Forums
90926 Topics
1062481 Posts

Max Online: 788 @ 11/11/13 08:06 PM
Moon Phase
CURRENT MOON
August
Su M Tu W Th F Sa
1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
31
Forum Donations
The TnDeer.Com Deer Talk Forum is for Tennessee Deer Hunters by Tennessee Deer Hunters. If you enjoy using our Talk Forum and would like to contribute to help in it's up-keep. Just submit your contribution by clicking on the DONATE button below and paying with PayPal or a major credit card. Any amount is much appreciated. Thanks for your support!

TN Burn Safe

Generated in 0.061 seconds in which 0.001 seconds were spent on a total of 14 queries. Zlib compression enabled.