Breaking: High Court Upholds Mich Affirmative Action BanPosted: April 22, 2014
“But without checks, democratically approved legislation can oppress minority groups…”
— Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor
WASHINGTON (AP) —Mark Sherman reports: The Supreme Court on Tuesday upheld Michigan’s ban on using race as a factor in college admissions despite one justice’s impassioned dissent that accused the court of wanting to wish away racial inequality.
The justices said in a 6-2 ruling that Michigan voters had the right to change their state constitution in 2006 to prohibit public colleges and universities from taking account of race in admissions decisions. The justices said that a lower federal court was wrong to set aside the change as discriminatory.
“This case is not about how the debate about racial preferences should be resolved. It is about who may resolve it.”
— Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy
The decision bolstered similar voter-approved initiatives banning affirmative action in education in California and Washington state. A few other states have adopted laws or issued executive orders to bar race-conscious admissions policies.
Justice Anthony Kennedy said voters chose to eliminate racial preferences, presumably because such a system could give rise to race-based resentment. Kennedy said nothing in the Constitution or the court’s prior cases gives judges the authority to undermine the election results.
“This case is not about how the debate about racial preferences should be resolved. It is about who may resolve it,” Kennedy said.
In dissent, Justice Sonia Sotomayor said the decision tramples on the rights of minorities, even though the amendment was adopted democratically.
“But without checks, democratically approved legislation can oppress minority groups,” said Sotomayor, who read her dissent aloud in the courtroom Tuesday. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg sided with Sotomayor in dissent.
Judges “ought not sit back and wish away, rather than confront, the racial inequality that exists in our society,” Sotomayor said. She is one of two justices, along with Clarence Thomas, who have acknowledged that affirmative action was a factor in their admission to Princeton University and Yale University, respectively. They both attended law school at Yale. Thomas is a staunch opponent of racial preferences.
At 58 pages, Sotomayor’s dissent was longer than the combined length of the four opinions in support of the outcome.
Follow Mark Sherman on Twitter at: @shermancourt
- Affirmative action on tap at the Supreme Court: In Plain English (scotusblog.com)
- US Court Strikes Down Mich. Affirmative Action Ban (abcnews.go.com)
- High Court Weighs Mich. Ban on Affirmative Action (abcnews.go.com)
- Coming soon: Supreme Court ruling on Michigan’s affirmative action ban in college admissions (mlive.com)
- Counting the votes: Today’s affirmative action argument, in Plain English (scotusblog.com)
- Supremes weigh ban on affirmative action… (politico.com)
- High court avoids larger ruling on affirmative action (q13fox.com)
- Affirmative Action Ban Gets Support at High Court Hearing – Bloomberg (bloomberg.com)
- Pro-affirmative Action Side Mocked by Conservative AND Liberal Supremes (punditfromanotherplanet.com)