![]() ![]() ![]() Roberts wrote that both admissions policies lacked "sufficiently focused and measurable objectives" that warranted considering race. Roberts wrote that the entire point of the equal protection clause is that treating someone differently because of their skin color "is not like treating them differently because they are from a city or from a suburb, or because they play the violin poorly or well." What the Supreme Court said about affirmative action "We cannot let this decision be the last word," he said. He offered his own guidance to colleges, telling institutions they should not abandon their commitment to ensure diversity, and proposed new standards where colleges take into account adversities a student has overcome. "This is not a normal court," the president said.īiden added that he "strongly, strongly" disagrees with the decision. President Joe Biden slammed the decision, asserting that the ruling "walked away from decades of precedent." ![]() The decision appeared to leave some room for colleges to consider race in less systematic ways though it will likely take years and more litigation to test the boundaries of those limits. Though the outcome was expected, the decision will have wide reverberations in a nation that continues to wrestle with a fraught history with race. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson recused herself from the Harvard case, so that vote was 6-2. The vote was 6-3 in the University of North Carolina case, with the court's conservative wing lining up behind Roberts. Here are the biggest cases pending at the Supreme Court The decision drew a sharp rebuke from the court's liberal wing, who said it rolled "decades of precedent and momentous progress."Ĭhief Justice John Roberts, long a skeptic of race-based policies, wrote that too many universities "have concluded, wrongly, that the touchstone of an individual’s identity is not challenges bested, skills built, or lessons learned but the color of their skin." The nation's constitutional history, he wrote, "does not tolerate that choice."Ĭase tracker: Race, religion and debt. In one of its most closely watched cases this year, the court ruled along ideological lines that the way the two nationally recognized colleges approached race violated the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment. WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court on Thursday struck down affirmative action admissions policies used by Harvard College and the University of North Carolina to diversify their campuses, a decision with enormous consequences not only for higher education but also the American workplace. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |