Supreme Court rules Michigan has the right to end affirmative action for college entry
A State has the right to determine how students get into college says the US Supreme Court on Tuesday. The opinion released this morning preserves a law that ban affirmative action for college admissions.
In a 6-2 decision, the Justices said the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals was wrong to set aside the voter-approved ban as discriminatory.
Justice Sotomayor sided with the minority in the latest ruling from the US Supreme Court photo donkeyhotey donkeyhotey.wordpress.com
Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote the majority decision in the case Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action, while Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Stephen Breyer authored concurring opinions. Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ruth Bader Ginsburg dissented, and Justice Elena Kagan recused herself from the case.
Kennedy stressed that the case was not about the constitutionality or merits of the race-conscious admission policies of colleges and universities, but instead hinged on whether voters in the state may choose to prohibit consideration of such preferences. (Emphasis added-The Dispatch)
It’s important to understand the court’s ruling that States’ Rights won in the end. “Here, the principle that the consideration of race in admissions is permissible when certain conditions are met is not being challenged,” Kennedy wrote in the majority opinion.
He said nothing in the Constitution or the court’s prior cases allowed judges to undermine the will of voters. “The decision by Michigan voters reflects the ongoing national dialogue about such practices,” Kennedy wrote.
Justice Sotomayor, who read her dissent from the bench, noted that “without checks, democratically approved legislation can oppress minority groups.
“For that reason, our Constitution places limits on what a majority of the people may do,” she said. “This case implicates one such limit: the guarantee of equal protection of the laws.”
Proposal 2 passed in 2006, which was then struck down by The Sixth Court in 2012. The San Jose Mercury News says the case has “major implications” for a similar ban, known as Proposition 209, that was based by California voters in 1996.
