The Atlantic: The Supreme Court’s Next Targets

May 21, 2022 Hunter Wallace Affirmative Action, Alt-Center, Anti-Racism, Anti-White, Politics, Populists, Progressives, Race Relations 20

Affirmative action is next on the chopping block.

The Atlantic:

“Following the Supreme Court’s leak of a draft decision overturning Roe v. Wade, many Court-watchers and pundits have pointed to same-sex marriage and access to contraceptives as rights now potentially at risk. And while in the long run the logic set forth in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization could undermine those precedents, the Court may eviscerate other major areas of law far sooner—in fact, with cases on its docket this current term. Notably, the Court may soon declare the use of race in college admissions—affirmative action—illegal, and it may also massively constrain the power of the federal government to protect the environment.

The questions at hand in each case—Dobbs, Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, and West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency—differ. But they all raise issues that have been the targets of conservative legal scholars for decades, and they will now be decided by a right-wing Court with seemingly little commitment to its own precedents.

The use of race in admissions has been permissible in the eyes of the Court since 1978, when Justice Lewis F. Powell Jr. delivered his opinion in Regents of the University of California v. Bakke.Allan Bakke, who was white, argued that he had been denied entry into UC Davis’s medical school because of its affirmative-action program, which reserved 16 of the 100 seats in each class for minority students—though the school contended that his age (35) and average test scores had more to do with his rejection. Powell ruled that race could be used in admissions in concert with a host of other factors—including grades, extracurricular activities, and test scores—to build a class, because diversity was an important interest of the state’s. As such, his decision was not about righting historical wrongs, but about diversity for the benefit of the entire campus community. Over the next 40 years, the decision was upheld time and again. …”

20 Comments

  1. Gayway Pundit just did a really evil hit piece on Anglin and Weev and the dissident right in general. The Orcs are mobilizing.

  2. Of course these are all evils that the SCOTUS may be limiting, which is good. But the reason for setting new limits on sin is likely to be fascist preparation for war, getting the population disciplined on a war footing.

  3. We conservatives have a reputation for grousing about our leaders’ letting us down, (and Donald Trump let us down countless times). But let’s admit that Trump’s nominating Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Barrett to the SCOTUS has worked out well for us in this.

  5. Even if the SC overturned the 1978 ruling would it really stop race base admissions in favor of minorities or would the universities and govt find other ways around it?

  6. “seemingly little commitment to its own precedents.” Heh, the whole last several decades saw the court carrying very little about “precedent”. Thats why we have so much dispute about much of the civil rights laws we have. Because, exactly, they had “seemingly little commitment to its own precedents.” So many of the press acts like history started in the late 20th century.

  8. I have a problem with the gateway Pundit. As I understand, its editor is homosexual, and he adopted a filipino boy, and got him past immigration rules to ‘be his companion.’ After that, I really didn’t listen to much the pundit says on anything.
    I do read daily stormer, but also take a lot of it with a grain of salt. Anglin is funny, has some shrewd observations, and I have seen what he’d says is outrageous or disgusting becomes, after a few months, a verified fact.
    I admit that many of these sites are infiltrated by feds and a lot of worms sent in to create internal dissent. as for ‘false information,’ it’s really hard to say what is true or false anymore. In the1991 novel Serpent’s Walk, by Randolph Calverhall, a disaster allows the right to take power, but in the end its pro-American nationalist president seems disoriented and lost. it turns out he is a holograph used to keep the electorate unaware of a coup. Could we say that Biden isn’t some kind of holograph? I’m not throwing out any theories, just that this system is incapable of any honesty. it lies and disseminates simply that’s because it can’t do anything else.
    You can see why, in the end, when the Huns broke into Rome, there might have been more than a few Romans happy to see them, compared to what the imperial system had become. In the end, Rome ws much more damaged by civil war from ts own rotten factions than from the barbarians.

    I always supported Harold Covington, although I understand he had a lot of baggage, but he said some very truthful things. In the end, we’re stuck with the truth-tellers we have.

  9. DESPERATE TO DISCRIMINATE: Elite schools search for new ways to ‘diversify’ as SCOTUS decision on affirmative action looms — While affirmative action could potentially face the chopping block, universities have stressed their commitment to diversity in their admissions

    With a potential ruling in the Supreme Court regarding affirmative action looming, the possibility of it being overturned has elite college campuses struggling to figure out how to stick to their “diversity” efforts without being able to factor in race. … “Regardless of the court’s decision, we will continue to advance our diversity, equity, and inclusion goals,” said Anthony Monaco, president of Tufts University. “Diversity is vital to creating a climate that encourages learning both in and outside of the classroom, fosters respectful conversations across differences, and provides all our students with transformational experiences.”

    Note the glib assertions about the value of ‘diversity’, with zero evidence to support them — it’s a kind of religious dogma.

    As I said before, with the sheer amount of admitting and hiring that goes on, it will nearly impossible to enforce a ban on affirmative action, no matter how precisely that is defined — re university admissions, not using standard test scores like the SAT and ACT will make it even harder — so more selective schools may decide to stop using them.

Comments are closed.