Court Rules Michigan's Voter Approved Affirmative Action Ban is Unconstitutional

[Ice]

A federal appeals court on Friday ruled that Michigan voters did not have the right in 2006 to ban public colleges and universities from considering race and ethnicity in admissions.
The 2-to-1 ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit was based on the idea that the referendum that voters approved had the effect of denying political rights to minority citizens in Michigan. State officials immediately announced an appeal, which will have the effect of keeping the Michigan ban on consideration of race in place for now

...

Minority citizens are at a disadvantage under Michigan's ban on the consideratiittees or campaign to elect trustees (as Michigan's three universities have trustees elected in statewide elections). But someone seeking to restore the consideration of race in admissions would have to push for a new vote by the state -- a much more difficult task to accomplish.

"The stark contrast between the avenues for political change available to different admissions proponents following Proposal 2 illustrates why the amendment cannot be construed as a mere repeal of an existing race-related policy," said the decision. "Had those favoring abolition of race-conscious admissions successfully lobbied the universities' admissions units, just as underrepresented minorities did to have these policies adopted in the first place, there would be no equal protection problem."

This probably won't last though:

The two judges in the majority -- Ransey Guy Cole Jr. and Martha Craig Daughtrey -- were both nominated by President Clinton. Judge Gibbons was nominated by President George W. Bush. One reason some doubt that the full appeals court will uphold Friday's decision is that 10 of its 15 members are Republican appointees.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/educati...-action_n.htm#

Would defenders of the appellate court care to argue its point? Quite honestly, this seems like quite a lot of B.S. to me.

[Centurion1]

This probably won't last though:



http://www.usatoday.com/news/educati...-action_n.htm#

Would defenders of the appellate court care to argue its point? Quite honestly, this seems like quite a lot of B.S. to me.

I hate affirmative action quite a bit. I simply hated it more after going through the process of applying to the military academies.

[a completely inoffensive name]

I hate affirmative action quite a bit. I simply hated it more after going through the process of applying to the military academies.

You should chill bro. It's one thing to think it is a bad policy, but hating it is just dumb. Bad policies are not evil policies. Some one at some point it was a good idea to try and help blacks get into college since they were repressed for decades and decades. By this point, those that would have helped themselves have mostly done so already and are living in the middle class now, so the policy is just outdated.

Would defenders of the appellate court care to argue its point? Quite honestly, this seems like quite a lot of B.S. to me.

Legal precedent is B.S.? They followed the example of two SCOTUS rulings that were related to the situation. The two person majority thought this case was similar enough for precedent to be applied and the single person minority thought it didn't. What a bunch of activist liberals!

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

This probably won't last though:



http://www.usatoday.com/news/educati...-action_n.htm#

Would defenders of the appellate court care to argue its point? Quite honestly, this seems like quite a lot of B.S. to me.

Just goes to show - Affirmative Action is basically illegal in Europe by treaty, the ECHR would eat this decision for breakfast.

[Centurion1]

You should chill bro. It's one thing to think it is a bad policy, but hating it is just dumb. Bad policies are not evil policies. Some one at some point it was a good idea to try and help blacks get into college since they were repressed for decades and decades. By this point, those that would have helped themselves have mostly done so already and are living in the middle class now, so the policy is just outdated.



Legal precedent is B.S.? They followed the example of two SCOTUS rulings that were related to the situation. The two person majority thought this case was similar enough for precedent to be applied and the single person minority thought it didn't. What a bunch of activist liberals!

Naw I hate it. Did you know when applying to the Naval Academy as a minority you are allowed to have up to .3 lower on your GPA and like 200 points off your sat as minimum standards. This is to produce not only our fighting men and women but officer corp? You know the people who hold the vast majority of responsibility for our billions of dollars worth of equipment and more importantly our soldiers lives.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Naw I hate it. Did you know when applying to the Naval Academy as a minority you are allowed to have up to .3 lower on your GPA and like 200 points off your sat as minimum standards. This is to produce not only our fighting men and women but officer corp? You know the people who hold the vast majority of responsibility for our billions of dollars worth of equipment and more importantly our soldiers lives.

Yes, what is your ******* point? That the policy is dumb? Cool, I get it. I agree. Can you not be a child?

Did you know that my entire student government loves to spend its time trying to get "Ethnic Studies" as a new major, even though my uni has no more money left? And they are willing for money to be taken elsewhere (AKA taken from other majors) just as long as we can say we have this ******* major? It is the most backwards thing I think we could be doing right now in regard to how we spend our time. Yet, I don't sit there and say I hate all you people. And I hate this policy and the student government itself.

Christ, is it any wonder why no one in America wants to talk about issues anymore?

[Strike For The South]

Is AA past it's usefullness? Probably

But to say that Whites have not had a clear advantage over minority groups in this country is disingenous at best. Their is a reason these policies are there

And yea I know you grew up farming and the black kid next door got a BMW for his birthday

But that's not what the statistics speak to

And yea I know when you try to enginier a society it doesn't work

Kind of like we enginired a permanent underclass for ~300 years

[Major Robert Dump]

I disagree.

Previous such decisions were based on the ideas (although retarded ideas they are) of the "value" of diversity in the classroom and the propensity for non-asian minorities to possibly be discriminated against, therefore we must discriminatee against whitey and asiany to prevent possible discrimination against the others. At lease those cases were arguable

This precedent they speak of in regards to limiting the political process fo minorities was (although I still disagree) at least clear in terms of the argument being made. This decision was based in part on the skewed number of voters who voted for and against the measure, which was divided sharply by race. That apparently proved enough to warrant whitey trying to interfere with minority admission into universities, which in turn apparently interferes with minority participation in political matters, even though the last I checked admissions into universities were not done by voters or politics but by a committee.

furthermore, such an argument would imply that all minorites with college actively participate in politics, which is no more true or untrue of college educated people of any race.

This decision will be overturned if appealed, and it is an example of activist judges defying not only common sense, but also a legal, binding vote. The majority may not always be right, but that does not mean that they are always wrong, either.

[Samurai Waki]

I'm not going to argue for or against AA; I know some people have used to it to their benefit, and others have abused it-- However this is the same with social security, and welfare programs. Michigan is a state where I see little need for AA anyways.

[Centurion1]

Yes, what is your ******* point? That the policy is dumb? Cool, I get it. I agree. Can you not be a child?

Did you know that my entire student government loves to spend its time trying to get "Ethnic Studies" as a new major, even though my uni has no more money left? And they are willing for money to be taken elsewhere (AKA taken from other majors) just as long as we can say we have this ******* major? It is the most backwards thing I think we could be doing right now in regard to how we spend our time. Yet, I don't sit there and say I hate all you people. And I hate this policy and the student government itself.

Christ, is it any wonder why no one in America wants to talk about issues anymore?

Wow you need to chill out bro. I don't even know how to respond to this sentence because every point I think you are trying to raise is absolutely nonsensical. What is your point from this post? To annoy me, to illustrate that there are always things that people dislike but you can't change, you had a bad day, your tampon is irritating you? If it is that everybody has things that they dislike then fine that also gives me the right to voice my opinion regarding it. If i choose to use such a descriptor for how I feel as hate well then damn that's my flipping right. I am perfectly willing to discuss the issue to the problem but I don't see you raising any points whatsoever.

I dislike the very notion of Affirmative action; i believe it was fostered with a noble goal but a stupid execution. You know what I believe would be a better idea, affirmative action on an economics scale. There are poor whites too and they are essentially receiving a negative compared to a poor black child or latino. Hell there are poor asians too. Why dont they have benefit programs aimed at economic status rather than race.

Perfect example: My roomate is african american he is a pre med major. His father is a surgeon at Yale Hospital. His mother is a community college professor. His grandmother has a phd and is a professor as well. But he gets the likely benefits of affirmative action. Then on campus he is allowed to join a group that is directly for low income tech majors. This group pays for quite a bit but is essentially closed to white students. Because it is targeted almost entirely on minorities. My roomate said there was one white girl in the entire group on campus out of several hundred.

Obviously I wish for all the ethnic groups to acheive equal status and levels of education but I would prefer that it be done across the board and not just for certain groups.

[Centurion1]

I'm not going to argue for or against AA; I know some people have used to it to their benefit, and others have abused it-- However this is the same with social security, and welfare programs. Michigan is a state where I see little need for AA anyways.

Detroit, Flint? The majority of the rust belt?

There is plenty of african american poverty in michigan actually

[Strike For The South]

Perfect example: My roomate is african american he is a pre med major. His father is a surgeon at Yale Hospital. His mother is a community college professor. His grandmother has a phd and is a professor as well. But he gets the likely benefits of affirmative action. Then on campus he is allowed to join a group that is directly for low income tech majors. This group pays for quite a bit but is essentially closed to white students. Because it is targeted almost entirely on minorities. My roomate said there was one white girl in the entire group on campus out of several hundred.
.

And yea I know you grew up farming and the black kid next door got a BMW for his birthday

And people get economic hardships all the time

Also, I can post The demographics of higher education but why go through that dog and pony show when we all know the answer

The real kicker is for profit college

It's almost sad really

[Fisherking]

I favor affirmative action.

But on economic ground and not racial. After all it is illegal to discriminate based on race...isn’t it?

[Strike For The South]

I favor affirmative action.

But on economic ground and not racial. After all it is illegal to discriminate based on race...isn’t it?

For the 2nd time and this time it may stick

They already do that

IDK 300 years of chattel slavery + another 100 of draconian social laws may require extreme measures

But yea I'm sure the black kid from the delta gets a fair shake when 1960 oxford MS looks over his transcript

Remember kids their are reasons things are done, even if they conflict with your tottaly awesome way of thinkning where the government is evil and always holds man back

[Centurion1]

For the 2nd time and this time it may stick

They already do that

IDK 300 years of chattel slavery + another 100 of draconian social laws may require extreme measures

But yea I'm sure the black kid from the delta gets a fair shake when 1960 oxford MS looks over his transcript

Remember kids their are reasons things are done

At this point people are happy to snag african americans or latinos regardless of aa. Having a high minority population is desirable for presenting a diverse college atmosphere. Doing AA type practices based off of economic well being is much more desirable. Your argument doesn't even make sense your just saying blacks were slaves and discriminate din our histories past and still would be without AA with which I strongly disagree. And tbh I do not blame for profit colleges for all this.

[Samurai Waki]

Detroit, Flint? The majority of the rust belt?

There is plenty of african american poverty in michigan actually

There is just quite a bit of poverty in general in Michigan. ;)

[Strike For The South]

At this point people are happy to snag african americans or latinos regardless of aa. Having a high minority population is desirable for presenting a diverse college atmosphere. Doing AA type practices based off of economic well being is much more desirable. Your argument doesn't even make sense your just saying blacks were slaves and discriminate din our histories past and still would be without AA with which I strongly disagree. And tbh I do not blame for profit colleges for all this.

Wow, that is what you took from my post?

I hate having to spell things out so I'm going to ask you to read it again

[Centurion1]

and that they still dont get proper treatment? is that your point?

cause its sort of hard to pick up in one liners.

[HoreTore]

Just goes to show - Affirmative Action is basically illegal in Europe by treaty, the ECHR would eat this decision for breakfast.

Ah, so that is why we have plenty of similar laws then? Like the Sami having reserved spots at universities in the north.

[Ice]

Legal precedent is B.S.? They followed the example of two SCOTUS rulings that were related to the situation. The two person majority thought this case was similar enough for precedent to be applied and the single person minority thought it didn't. What a bunch of activist liberals!

Thanks for explaining it so well. Mind going into depth more there and not turning this into a political pissing match? K thanks.

I disagree.

Previous such decisions were based on the ideas (although retarded ideas they are) of the "value" of diversity in the classroom and the propensity for non-asian minorities to possibly be discriminated against, therefore we must discriminatee against whitey and asiany to prevent possible discrimination against the others. At lease those cases were arguable

This precedent they speak of in regards to limiting the political process fo minorities was (although I still disagree) at least clear in terms of the argument being made. This decision was based in part on the skewed number of voters who voted for and against the measure, which was divided sharply by race. That apparently proved enough to warrant whitey trying to interfere with minority admission into universities, which in turn apparently interferes with minority participation in political matters, even though the last I checked admissions into universities were not done by voters or politics but by a committee.

furthermore, such an argument would imply that all minorites with college actively participate in politics, which is no more true or untrue of college educated people of any race.

This decision will be overturned if appealed, and it is an example of activist judges defying not only common sense, but also a legal, binding vote. The majority may not always be right, but that does not mean that they are always wrong, either.

Thanks. They had an article in the Detroit Free Press about how the court incorrectly applied past SCOTUS rulings to fit their agenda for this issue.

[CountArach]

Can we please keep the debate civil and move away from personal attacks?

[Skullheadhq]

You should chill bro. It's one thing to think it is a bad policy, but hating it is just dumb. Bad policies are not evil policies. Some one at some point it was a good idea to try and help blacks get into college since they were repressed for decades and decades.

Current generation doesn't have to suffer for the 'wrongs' of their ancestor. They can in no way be held responsible for what their grandparents did 60 years ago and should never have to apologise or be punished for it, that is plain wrong. Here in the Netherlands we call affirmative action 'positive' discriminiation, so that you have the best papers for an important job if you're an handicapped, female, islamic negro. There is nothing positive about positive discrimination. Happy the current government abolished it.

[CountArach]

Current generation doesn't have to suffer for the 'wrongs' of their ancestor. They can in no way be held responsible for what their grandparents did 60 years ago and should never have to apologise o be punished for it, that is plain wrong.

I've heard this argument before but to me it is far more important that if an institution is responsible for something (repression of coloured people for instance) then that institution bears the responsibility for fixing it, regardless of if the same people who were in power are there or not.

[Skullheadhq]

I've heard this argument before but to me it is far more important that if an institution is responsible for something (repression of coloured people for instance) then that institution bears the responsibility for fixing it, regardless of if the same people who were in power are there or not.

Even if that means punishing innocents and compensating those who were done no harm?

[Don Corleone]

Wow, that is what you took from my post?

I hate having to spell things out so I'm going to ask you to read it again

To be perfectly honest, I took a similar reading on my first purview. On re-reading it, the best interpretation I can afford you is that "if you make affirmative action laws stiff enough, then institutions with a history of discrimination will keep their ass in line to keep yet further Affirmative Action from being brought down upon them". Is that what you were going for?

I actually believe in affirmative action based on economic need. That is not what gets practiced in reality, and that is specifically what the whole Michigan case is about. It was specifically about allowing or disallowing quotas based solely on race, not on need.

Common sense tells you this is true. How many affirmative action programs for Chinese nationals do you see going on? They're dirt poor when they literally 'get off the boat'. Do you see Universities throwing affirmative action programs at them? Nope. And the reason why? For the real reason we do affirmative action in the first place... Asians don't vote as a block, Latinos and African-Americans do.

[Strike For The South]

Meh probably true but in the same vein AA was started for poor blacks right in the 60s when they couldn't get a fair shake and the statistics still speak to the fact Latinos and blacks are underepresented where as asains and whites are overepresented

Now it's been 50 years and you can't hope to enginier a society ad naueseum but I'm just pointing out their is a reason things are the way they are.

When federal troops have to escort you to high school some extreme measures are worth taking

Oxford MS is the home of the University of Mississippi

[Don Corleone]

Meh probably true but in the same vein AA was started for poor blacks right in the 60s when they couldn't get a fair shake and the statistics still speak to the fact Latinos and blacks are underepresented where as asains and whites are overepresented

Now it's been 50 years and you can't hope to enginier a society ad naueseum but I'm just pointing out their is a reason things are the way they are.

When federal troops have to escort you to high school some extreme measures are worth taking

Oxford MS is the home of the University of Mississippi

I got the reference to Oxford. My point would be... while you're working hard to advocate for Affirmative Action as a remedy to slavery and segregration/Jim-Crow; don't forget to include a heavy tax on the Italians, particularly the Romans, for all the mayhem they caused back in the day too. How many innocent Celtic, Germanic and other peoples were enslaved and treated as second class citizens in a Republic that held them back?

What's that you say... we've moved on from that? Exactly...

Edit: I just reread your reply here and I missed your key choice words: "Underrepresented" and "overrepresented". May I ask you exactly how you define these terms?

I'm assuming you mean that if 10% of the general population is black, then therefore 10% of the university population must also be black, and no more than 10% of the prison population can ever be black.... i.e. the conventional definition of 'overrepresentation" and 'underrepresentation'. Am I correct in this?

[Skullheadhq]

asains and whites are overepresented

Since lots of Asians are on universities, maybe it isn't racism that's causing the negroe/latino underreprisentation but ther own skills/will to learn. How else can one explain why Asians are so well represented in universities? So, no need for Affirmative Action here.

[Vladimir]

Since lots of Asians are on universities, maybe it isn't racism that's causing the negroe/latino underreprisentation but ther own skills/will to learn. How else can one explain why Asians are so well represented in universities? So, no need for Affirmative Action here.

Culture. We're a culturally segregated country. For example: Successful black people are still looked down upon by many of their peers. The majority of the problem is with the people themselves.

[Strike For The South]

I got the reference to Oxford. My point would be... while you're working hard to advocate for Affirmative Action as a remedy to slavery and segregration/Jim-Crow; don't forget to include a heavy tax on the Italians, particularly the Romans, for all the mayhem they caused back in the day too. How many innocent Celtic, Germanic and other peoples were enslaved and treated as second class citizens in a Republic that held them back?

There is a quite difference Don
We have had the same nation state and set of laws since 1787. Modern day Italy has nothing to do with the Romans. Modern day America has allot to do with chattel slavery and Jim Crow. Even more so when these policies were enacted. My posts here are simply pointing that out. The whole thread has been a circle jerk of the en vouge "trampled on white man" stereotype that people like to perpetuate. If it's not the black kid in the application process, it's the Indian kid once he gets into school, and then the woman when he applys for a job :rollseyes:

These policies have outlived there usefullness but they served a very important purpose at one point. I would simply point that out.

I'm assuming you mean that if 10% of the general population is black, then therefore 10% of the university population must also be black, and no more than 10% of the prison population can ever be black.... i.e. the conventional definition of 'overrepresentation" and 'underrepresentation'. Am I correct in this?

Let's replace that with skewed absolutely in one direction. I'm well aware of the prison population and a crime is a crime. Please don't confuse the 2 but in a state like Texas where the minorty population is around 50% There is no reason minorty representation in 4 year unis should be around 20% which includes the Chinese and Indian students which, suffice to say isn't a big part of the population

Now what are the reasons for this

Lack of money, Lack of education, and a mostly negative portryal in the medias

Of course I would say the institutionalized white power structure had a fair bit to do with all 3 and I feel it's disingenous to our fellow countrymen to step on their throats and not at least try to do something


What's that you say... we've moved on from that? Exactly...

Edit: I just reread your reply here and I missed your key choice words: "Underrepresented" and "overrepresented". May I ask you exactly how you define these terms?

I'm assuming you mean that if 10% of the general population is black, then therefore 10% of the university population must also be black, and no more than 10% of the prison population can ever be black.... i.e. the conventional definition of 'overrepresentation" and 'underrepresentation'. Am I correct in this?[/QUOTE]