As with the death of Roe, the likely impending death of affirmative action at the Supreme Court changes Trump’s legacy. This will be another enormous culture war victory.
“The end of affirmative action, at least on college campuses, is almost certainly near.
The big picture: The Supreme Court said in 2003 that colleges and universities could consider race as a factor when deciding which students to admit, for the sake of building a diverse student body. But now, the much more conservative court appears to be changing its mind. …”
The 2024 election cycle kicks off in less than two weeks.
Heading into the 2024 presidential election, Trump will be able to boast about appointing the judges who overturned Roe v. Wade and killed affirmative action. The Supreme Court will also have two more years to weigh in on other polarizing issues before the next presidential election.
How astonishing. In one term the most besieged President in US history achieved more than all the GOP frauds and turn coats in decades. First Roe, (Abortion) and now affirmative action.
Yes, though President Trump was a disappointment on so many levels, one of his enduring achievements will be the reform of the Judiciary.
This is one area where, as well, I have to credit Speaker McConnell.
It’s a big reason why they, those who control The West, are so nervous now…
As I said before, and as was recently pointed out again here (link), it will be very difficult to enforce a ban on affirmative action, especially at schools that drop the requirement to submit standard test scores — so if colleges and universities want to ‘brace’ for an end to affirmative action, one concrete thing they can do is drop the requirement to submit SAT, ACT, etc scores (I think not requiring HS transcripts will be more difficult) — this will immediately make admissions more subjective, and proving discrimination via racial affirmative action will be more difficult — some schools have already dropped the SAT.
A long time ago, well before there was a big national debate about it, as part of a scholarship competition I was asked about affirmative action by the panel of people interviewing me — and I remember I said I thought it was a bad idea for two reasons: 1) it was unfair to pull the rug out from under people by suddenly removing merit and adding race as an important criterion, and 2) people who are members of groups known to benefit from affirmative action would be regarded with suspicion by their peers — there was a more or less blank reaction, so I wasn’t sure what they thought — but I did not progress beyond that stage in the competition.
” . . . — but I did not progress beyond that stage in the competition.”
I’m shocked, shocked! People can abide anything, except the truth.
the end of woke the end of dumbing down education. the next is to apply it to buisness as well no more quotos we are taling back our country
There are almost no schools that openly use race or sex as a factor for admissions as it is. They use essays and interviews to find people with “unique experiences” or something like that. It just happens that all of these unique experiences belong to underperforming brown people and females.
“, Trump will be able to boast about appointing the judges who overturned Roe v. Wade”
And many nitwits say there isn’t any difference who’s in office. There is a big difference, not as much as we would like, but still significant.
we were energy indepentant . low gas prices low food costs and we had better control of the border leaving them in Mexico. our president was taking money under the table from China. our enemys feared us
None of these programs should have ever been enacted in the 1st place.
So true, but what are we going to do with this mess we’ve inherited, how do we remedy it ?
That’s the problem with the mess we inherited, others before us let it get out of control and didn’t stop it. The SC might end affirmative action but will it really? No ,it will be left up to the states just like the abortion. If you really want to end these things, it should be nation wide and not left up to the states otherwise it’s just putting a band aide on a festering wound.
Some interesting SMO developments recently — I saw it reported/claimed that the mobile of Liz Truss was ‘hacked’ by the Russians (this is of course possible, as due to the fact most people have many apps running, the phone pretty much always has an IP address assigned and is detectable and reachable via the internet) — now there is this:
link — RUSSIAN INTELLIGENCE: RUSSIA NOW HAS EVIDENCE THAT THE BRITISH WERE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE NORD STREAM SABOTAGE. “IT’S DONE”, TEXTED LIZ TRUSS ONE MINUTE AFTER THE ACTUAL EXPLOSION TO BLINKEN
Another report I saw claimed the Russians believe the British assisted Ukraine in attacking the Black Sea Fleet with drones — and that a sophisticated American reconnaissance UAV took off from Sicily and was in the air over the Black Sea at the time of the drone attacks.
If I was the Russians, I would place high priority on production of hypersonic missiles and acquiring targeting/tracking data on US aircraft carriers and capital ships of the Royal Navy.
Also, there’s substantial evidence that british SAS were the planners behind the truck bomb explosion of the bridge.
I don’t know how much anti-satellite warfare capability Russia possesses but low earth orbit satellites for recon, navigation and comms are the Achille’s heel of the U.S. war effort. The USSR tested anti-satellite weapons as did the U.S. Govt. in the 1980’s. China has also demonstrated this capability. Many satellites are only orbiting about 200 miles above the earth and are within reach of ASW technology.
If Russia were to ‘accidentally’ disable a few troublesome LEO satellites they would certainly be within their rights. Even long range drones require satellite assistance, they are not fully autonomous. Satellite capabilities are a huge U.S./UK/NATO advantage against Russia.
Eah, our ship’s or english ship’s, don’t need too be sunk, they need too be in our control, OUR’S not the devil freaks who currently rule over us…..
But SCOTUS refuses to do anything about ELECTION FRAUD! Nothing else matters and they damn well know it. NOTHING!
Demographics, unfortunately, is destiny.
If AA is bad for colleges, why not ban it everywhere? Why makes colleges so special? Workplaces at all levels would be so much more productive and harmonious without the AA morons and malcontents working their magic.
“Goy, if it’s bad for the gentiles, It’s good for the jwz.”
Todd, you make a excellent point, I agree completely
Every day with a contact with customer service, billing, tech support etc. is an exercise in how to defeat/dodge the AA hire behind a desk/glass barrier or in a phone cubicle farm.
link — Affirmative action is irrelevant to university enrollment today. No legal recourse is required for admissions officers to choose applicants based on, say, the vibrancy of their personal experience.
I guarantee you that white kids who are passed over do not see it as ‘irrelevant’ — and ‘legal recourse’, normally centered around the 14th Amendment, is seized by those challenging it, not by those practicing it.
And the example of Barbara Grutter shows how bad and unfair the practice is.
link — Per this link, Grutter had a 3.8 GPA and scored 161 on the LSAT, yet was denied admission to the Univ of Mich law school.
link — At this link you see that (nationally) a score of 161 put her at the 82.4 percentile, meaning 82.4% of those taking the LSAT scored lower than she did — admissions data given ‘for 20 top law schools’ is a bit shocking:
25% of admitted students scored at or below the 25th percentile score.
The 25th percentile is a score of approx 145 on the LSAT — so 25% of the students admitted to ’20 top law schools’ had an LSAT score of 145 or lower.
50% of admitted students scored at or below the 50th percentile score
The 50th percentile LSAT score is approx 152.
The Univ of Michigan law school is generally ranked in the top 15, sometimes in the top 10, so these percentile scores will be somewhat higher there.
Even so, it is still clear Grutter was treated unfairly: with a class size of over 300, probably a few dozen non-whites with a lower GPA and lower LSAT scores were admitted ahead of her only because she was white.
“25% of admitted students scored at or below the 25th percentile score.”
For a nation that touts itself on it’s anti-racism, ‘Affirmative Action’ is the most ridiculous and flagrant example
‘Affirmative Action is another one of those Northeastern-birthed oxymorons, like Slavery being called ‘Migrant Labour’ or ‘Free Trade’, that simply has no place in this land.
If we get one thing straight about this land in the next decade – how about let’s start calling things what they are.
The first area is to call this America a White Country and White Land; one which has respect for it’s minorities – NOT a minority-majority land which has no respect for it’s White Founders and founding, and which is constantly embroiled in changing the history to match the latest demographic.
One of the few tarnishes on Ronald Reagan’s legacy was that Sandra Day O’Conner voted to keep A A.
Glad to see that mistake is going to be corrected soon.
Also isn’t the A.A. case about China-men wanting to get into Jewish controlled Harvard?
It seems to me that ever since Ruth Bader Ginsburg died Jewish power has been declining precipitously: Ye has named the Jew. Czar Putin has successfully intimidated Israel to not send weapons to the ZOG in Ukraine, now yellow commies are going to take over Harvard from the hideous nose creatures of Zion.
One of the few tarnishes on Ronald Reagan’s legacy was that Sandra Day O’Conner voted to keep A A.
LOL, ‘OK boomer’ — Reagan, who was more of a libertarian than a ‘conservative’, signed two of the worst pieces of legislation since the Civil Rights era: 1) the 1986 amnesty, and 2) the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (also 1986).
1) Because it set a horrible precedent, including that even a ‘conservative’ would amnesty illegals.
2) Gave liability protection to vaccine makers, as long as their vaccine was recommended for kids (hence the recent push to get the COVID vaccine recommended for kids) — after that, via the pharma-corrupted CDC, vaccines of all kinds appeared on this list, although there were no long-term studies on any of them — to this day, the medical establishment does not fund research on, and denies any link between, the alarming rise in the autism rate and the dramatic rise in the number of vaccines administered to kids, even though there is strong circumstantial evidence.
So fuck Reagan.
Why was there never any affirmative action for Whites, hispanics, and asians in football?