I am not what I dreamed of being as a youngster because of Affirmative Action. Facilitating mechanisms were blocked for me because of my immutable characteristics. If discrimination is wrong, it is always wrong. But, I found another way to succeed. That is the beauty of a capitalist system. There are countless paths to the goal. I am more capable and resourceful than I would have been had I had access to facilitating mechanisms. So in that sense, I am grateful. Affirmative Action as administered by the government is immoral.

I would take it one step further. After this shit is shot down, those who didn't meet those special groups should receive monetary compensation from the schools that rejected them. UNC rejected me years ago to their MBA program and one of the possible reasons was: not adding to the diversity pool of the class.

I also know a lady, a black lady, who went to UNC for undergrad. She's fucking dumb and actually believes her being a black female has had nothing to do with her career success.

They should go back and review all the admissions applications and if that person shouldn't have been admitted in the first place, retract those degrees. Fuck that place and the people.

quote:

Originally posted by Edmond:
I would take it one step further. After this shit is shot down, those who didn't meet those special groups should receive monetary compensation from the schools that rejected them. UNC rejected me years ago to their MBA program and one of the possible reasons was: not adding to the diversity pool of the class.

For the last 25-30 years the airlines have been giving strong hiring preference to pilots who can check the right boxes. White and male is not the correct combination.

Today is a unique hiring environment, yet the preference is still apparent. Back when I was coming up in the career, at minimum requirements (flight time, ratings) the preferred demographics got interviews and jobs. The rest of us had to wait another 5 years or more to get an interview.

This was due to a court case where it was found the airlines didn't hire qualified women.

Professional pilots are perhaps the easiest to objectively screen. Total flight time, jet time, PIC (captain) time, airline experience, ratings, etc. Take the best from numbers on paper of the applicants, interview them to find the right personalities and other important factors to fit your company, and hire them.

But for the last few decades they have actively discriminated against white males. Easily provable because of the simple quantitative qualifications.

The income difference across a career is probably well over $5million.

Legalized affirmative action discrimination harms just as much or more than what it was supposed to correct.

Absolutely, that pretty well sums it up for these current times.

Affirmative action is now history.

Supreme Court outlaws affirmative action in college admissions in landmark decision

The Supreme Court struck down affirmative action programs at Harvard University and the University of North Carolina Thursday, ruling that both institutions were in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment.

The decision overturns the Supreme Court’s 2003 ruling in Grutter v. Bollinger, which found that colleges could consider race as one factor in the admissions process to achieve a diverse student body.

“Eliminating racial discrimination means eliminating all of it,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in the majority opinion. “And the Equal Protection Clause, we have accordingly held, applies ‘without regard to any differences of race, of color, or of nationality’—it is ‘universal in [its] application.'”

Roberts was joined in his opinion by all five of his colleagues on the court’s conservative wing: Justice Samuel Alito, Justice Clarence Thomas, Justice Amy Coney Barrett and Justice Brett Kavanaugh.

The court’s three liberals, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented in the UNC case, while Jackson — a graduate of Harvard College and Harvard Law School as well as a former member of the university’s Board of Overseers, recused herself from the matter involving the Ivy League school.

https://nypost.com/2023/06/29/...-college-admissions/

Color me skeptical. There is no punishment prescribed for ignoring or sidestepping a SCOTUS decision. Academia will not just roll over and accept this. They'll find workarounds. The only way this decision will be enforced is with civil lawsuits by folks who didn't get into a school, despite having far better academic credentials. And that would take a long time.

quote:

Originally posted by Rick Lee:
Color me skeptical. There is no punishment prescribed for ignoring or sidestepping a SCOTUS decision. Academia will not just roll over and accept this. They'll find workarounds. The only way this decision will be enforced is with civil lawsuits by folks who didn't get into a school, despite having far better academic credentials. And that would take a long time.

Whatever you do, don't celebrate a victory. Lord knows, we get enough defeats without turning this into one.

It's a win for us. As in, the non discriminatory, select on merit, 'Joe Normals'.

quote:

Originally posted by Rick Lee:
Color me skeptical.

Where's your white flag? After all, everyone knows that when you achieve a victory, it's time to surrender.

quote:

Originally posted by Rick Lee:
Color me skeptical. There is no punishment prescribed for ignoring or sidestepping a SCOTUS decision. Academia will not just roll over and accept this. They'll find workarounds. The only way this decision will be enforced is with civil lawsuits by folks who didn't get into a school, despite having far better academic credentials. And that would take a long time.

Well yeah. That's how it's always been. The Supreme Court is not a law enforcement body. They simply interpret the Constitutionality of a law. Now though Asian students for instance will have grounds to sue a university if they are denied acceptance based on their race.

Oh, I'm definitely pleased that Asian and other students and parents will be able to sue these schools. But this decision is not like a switch that turns the injustice off in an instant. I kind of thought the 14th Amendment was all we really needed, but then (again) there's no punishment for ignoring it, which why it takes a SCOTUS decision to reaffirm what's been the law of the land for 150 yrs already.

quote:

Originally posted by Rick Lee:
Oh, I'm definitely pleased that Asian and other students and parents will be able to sue these schools. But this decision is not like a switch that turns the injustice off in an instant. I kind of thought the 14th Amendment was all we really needed, but then (again) there's no punishment for ignoring it, which why it takes a SCOTUS decision to reaffirm what's been the law of the land for 150 yrs already.

I believe SCOTUS had previously ruled decades ago that Affirmative action was to be accepted or tolerated, at least at the time since it was somehow necessary to right a wrong so to speak. But they also acknowledged that in the future it will likely have to be overturned since it was obviously unconstitutional. So this ruling finally corrects that.

I'm going completely off memory here so I may be completely off base.

quote:

Originally posted by Rick Lee:
Color me skeptical. There is no punishment prescribed for ignoring or sidestepping a SCOTUS decision. Academia will not just roll over and accept this. They'll find workarounds. The only way this decision will be enforced is with civil lawsuits by folks who didn't get into a school, despite having far better academic credentials. And that would take a long time.

I'm betting lawyers will be lining up for a slice of the Civil Suit settlements. These institutions have deep pockets and with a sympathetic jury, the damages paid out could be significant.

Rome wasn't built in a Day!

I keep thinking about Para's "We have a victory coming our way" thread when I read about decisions like this from the SC and see the slow motion implosion of the Biden Panhandling Empire.

quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:
I believe SCOTUS had previously ruled decades ago that Affirmative action was to be accepted or tolerated, at least at the time since it was somehow necessary to right a wrong so to speak. But they also acknowledged that in the future it will likely have to be overturned since it was obviously unconstitutional. So this ruling finally corrects that.

I'm going completely off memory here so I may be completely off base.

Your recollection jibes with mine.

However, race-biased affirmative action has been in place now fifty years. If it hasn't undone past wrongs yet, I'd argue it never would have.

This ruling is correct, IMO.

quote:

Originally posted by Flash-LB:
Affirmative action is very obviously unconstitutional and it will be overturned.

Too bad they couldn't have gotten rid of it when I was young, but OTOH, if it weren't for affirmative action, I probably would have never started my company, something that has been extremely good for me and my retirement.

Your story is my story. Had I not been equitied based on my immutable characteristics, I wouldn’t have been as strong as I am now. I would have had a soft life and a mind numbed view of my government and politics. I’m certain I would have been a CNN drone comfortably wedged into the vulnerable upper middle class. Instead they red pilled me and my eyes were opened. Mrs DF and I have pressed against the resistance of self determination and delayed gratification. Retrospectively, I am grateful for our difficulty and having been blessed with the patience and accumulated discipline to achieve what we have together. Affirmative Action is unconstitutional and instructive about the nature of how unprincipled and the primitive minded think regardless of race.

I don't know if anyone else here has been involved in bidding for government contracts, but minority-owned and, in particular, women-owned get preference. Have for decades. I'd like to see that crap go away. I guess this ruling may take care of part of that problem, but not all of it.

I assume this is just affirmative action in college admissions and not across the board for everything?

quote:

Originally posted by Rick Lee:
Oh, I'm definitely pleased that...

Oh, yeah, you're fairly beaming with joy.

The older standard allowed race to be a factor but that morphed into it being a driving factor.

I've glanced at today's ruling and it says race still can be a consideration of the person in terms of accomplishments but it cannot be used for wholesale admissions by excluding otherwise qualified applicants to promote whatever diverse student body the school desires.

In other words, skin color isn't going to count for much unless you've done something else with your life to warrant admission.

quote:

Originally posted by 229DAK:
I assume this is just affirmative action in college admissions and not across the board for everything?

Well, I imagine the decision speaks for the parties involved but no doubt it will generate a precedence that will affect much, much more.