The Supreme Court granted review in three cases today, but Fisher v. University of Texas — in which the use of racial and ethnic preferences in undergraduate admissions is challenged — was not among them. That’s not good news, but it’s possible that the justices are just mulling it over (the Court announced no denials today; we have to hope that Fisher is not on that list, likely to be released on Tuesday).
If there were a plethora of cases like Fisher out there, this wouldn’t be such a big deal, but there isn’t. For obvious reasons, it is hard to find students willing to be plaintiffs and lawyers willing to bring the inevitably long, complicated, and unremunerative actions on their behalf. And so we have the odd situation where there is widespread discrimination but few lawsuits; indeed, I’m not aware of any besides Fisher that are out there, nor any that have been brought since the Court’s University of Michigan decisions in 2003. So keep your fingers crossed this Martin Luther King Day weekend.
Perhaps the next case should inovlde an asian student or even a black student who feels that affirmative action treatment has actually disadvantaged him
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseGot an e-mail from UT@Dallas about a fellowship "for people of African descent"
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"The first Fellowship Programme for People of African Descent was launched by the Anti-Discrimination Section of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights in 2011"
Talk about a lack of self-awareness!!!
Hey! I'm descended from that Lucy lady they found in Africa. Maybe *I* can get some of that "fellowship" action!
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe peril for conservatives is great.
Bear with me: Last week, at one of the other NRO blogs, the blogger noted that he could accept parts of Ron Paul's program, but not others. However, the parts the blogger liked were the parts that would never come to pass (blocked by Congress or the courts), whereas the parts the blogger didn't like could be done immediately by executive order, as they are particular to that branch of government. Thus the blogger could not possibly support Ron Paul. My own views are the opposite: Ron Paul could do what I like, yet couldn't do what I dislike, and therefore I have no fear of him.
Now, in the last few decades the courts have systematically imposed a variety of radical leftists views at the state or federal level. Thus, we now have virtually unrestricted abortion, "diversity critical mass," and same-gender "marriage," among others. A full-spectrum conservative (social, economy, military) would likely have any socially conservative, or even socially non-leftist, policies blocked by the courts. To the extent that conservative economies requires severe fiscal restraint, that would likely be blocked by any Congress (think pork). Only an interventionist military would happen, since that is within executive power. Thus, a person such as myself, who is socially conservative but disapproves of military interventionism and a heavy military budget, has no incentive to vote for conservatives. The part I like, they can't do; the part I dislike, they will do. Might as well just vote leftist and be done with it.
If the Supreme Court refuses to take Fisher v. UT, or if it does but refuses to overturn Grutter v. Bollinger, then it will be one more nail in the conservative coffin. One leg of the three-legged stool will have been shortened, once again.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse