262 Comments

I’m so disgusted in this conservative court’s dismantling of fairness and equality for all our citizens !

Expand full comment

How long will it take a case against Title IX to get up to this bunch who won’t recuse or see inequality?

Expand full comment

I have the same concern.

We must fight this and get out the vote in 2024.

Expand full comment

I share your disgust and contempt. It is an illegitimate body that needs term limits as well as an increase in number to parallel the US circuit courts (13 - at least). What was once a fine institution has now deteriorated into a partisan group of hacks masquerading in legal nonsense. It is appalling and totally devoid of serving the nation. Feckless CJ complains about being too critical of the illegitimate majority, yet he leads the charge in ignoring precedent and forcing narrow religious and other imaginary ideology upon all of us. Concomitantly, the feckless CJ and other super majority members collect perks that would be impermissible to anyone else in the federal judiciary. What a mess!

Expand full comment

I am heartbroken. The majority justices either truly have no idea what obstacles people of color still face in this country, or worse - they know and have handed down this decision anyway.

Expand full comment

They bloody well know that the Bakke decision was a blow struck against the deep systemic racism in this country and that they had the long-awaited opportunity to plunge the dagger into the heart of Affirmative Action. That's been a right-wing fever dream since 1978 at least, perhaps even since 1963.

Equal Protection Clause, my ass. It's not about protecting the "equal" rights of white people, it's all about ensuring the continuity of the privileges and advantages white people have in American society simply because they're white. In other words, it's about perpetuating systemic racism.

JV writes, "Today’s decision is about politics, not principle." I'd note that we can draw a clear, straight line from the ideology driving the politics and this decision back to John C. Calhoun of South Carolina in the 1840s and 1850s. Simply put, it's permanent oligarchic white supremacy.

Today's SCOTUS majority unambiguously reaffirmed that they have no interest in legal principle and are but mere ideologues eager to impose their far-right views and drag this country back to a time when women and non-white people had no voice and rich white men controlled everything.

Expand full comment

It seems that the justices are not impartial. I find Justice Thomas particularly displeasing. What a White wannabe!

Expand full comment

And Thomas uses his own personal insecurities as an Affirmative Action college student to kick many others off the path that he benefited from.

Expand full comment

He knows how to pull the ladder up after him. And Donald Trump, whose father paid the big bucks for him to go to U Penn, and whose daughter benefitted from her father's "legacy," talks about "people with extraordinary ability....finally being rewarded." A sad, sad day for America. What will tomorrow's decisions bring?

Expand full comment

The irony of Trump crowing about applicants being admitted based purely on merit is breathtaking. What will happen is, many universities will stop admitting applicants of color, because now there will be no oversight and no law keeping racist universities' boards of trustees from adopting policies based not on merit, but on racial and ethnic prejudice.

Expand full comment

Yet it’s 2023. Another wave is gathering speed to counter this travesty opinion. I just hope it doesn’t take long too.

Expand full comment

And especially because the demographics are moving against them, they are hell-bent to preserve their self-ascribed status.

Expand full comment

Of course they know. It's why they did itl

Expand full comment

Yep. The cruelty is the point.

Expand full comment

Maybe more fear than cruelty.

Expand full comment

They know and they don't care about systemic/historic injustices because Leonard Leo (Federalist Society) tells them how to vote if he helps them get their seat.

Expand full comment

Isn’t it sickening to see the straight red line from Leonard Leo through billionaire extremists like Harlan Crowe to Thomas and Alito? This is the deepest, muddiest, most putrid swamp we could possibly imagine.

Expand full comment

How does America get itself out of this morass? Pres Biden is righting the ship of state on the Executive level through policies and example. Lots of work still to be done, especially the absolutely malfunctioning House of Representatives.

Expand full comment

Oh my, the House of Representatives is another kettle of fish. They simply revel in “retribution” ; wasn’t that what Trump demanded? They only try to legislate roll backs on things BIDEN has been able to do for the people of this divided nation. And present censures and articles of Impeachment, investigate everything accomplished looking for more to divide and conquer. But we are STRONG and will not allow them to turn this precious if flawed Constitutional Democracy into a fascist state. I believe in Maxwell Frost and Gen Z! Do you remember how idealistic and immortal you were at that age? Many marginalized groups will support Biden going forward but the ENERGY may arrive in the young who will inherit this Earth as is or recovered hopefully to some extent from the abuses piled on it by the greedy and wealthy who plundered it for so many years. 🇺🇸🌎🕊️

Expand full comment

I like your attitude, Judith. So many of our peers hardened to idealism long ago.

Expand full comment

We Organize and we Get Out The Vote each and every election. We must keep the focus on the importance of the Judicial Branch as well, in every election.

Expand full comment

Yes. President Biden has the wisdom and maturity to “take the punches” without stooping to their level.

Expand full comment

I’m interested in finding out just exactly how this Leonard Leo and the Federalist Society are destroying “stare decisis.”Racial equality takes one step forward and two steps back it seems. And ignoring the inequality in the Legacy admissions is most certainly prejudicial. My past reading indicates 💰💰💰 is at the root of this in bribes, campaign contributions for GOP candidates, we are certainly aware of luxury vacations given freely to accommodating judges.

Without ethics reform including transparency, term limits, and increasing the numbers of SCOTUS justices, we are doomed to loss of an essential one of our three pillars of Democracy. George Wallace I knew all too well coming from ALABAMA myself. Wonder if he’s resurrected in the Federalist Society? Suppose not, he was not as I recall a lawyer or a legally minded individual. He was a white supremacist, of course. 🥲Tears for today’s Black and diverse graduates coming from high schools all over the nation compromised already by political warfare, the Pandemic, all the other colliding crises for which they need the best academic facilities available to them. We’re compromising their futures already likely shortened by climate change. It is another sad day in America 🇺🇸. How many can we survive? And our beloved children? 🥲

Expand full comment

I'm going out on a limb here, Judith, but all the conservative justices are Catholic. LL is a member of Opus Dei, an ultra conservative-back-to-the Middle-Ages Catholic movement. Catholicism is, after all, an authoritarian faith.

I am not saying it is not a good religion, but there are subsets which frighten me, and this is one. I believe that the Justices believe they are beholden to a "higher authority" than secular law. They believe they are assisting "the greater good."

More than the munchkin-like MAGAs, it behoves us all to watch the creeping Christian nationalism movement, (Sometimes called Christofascism) promoted by evangelicals and ultra Catholics who are reactionary to the modernization of their faith. Both movements believe in the supremacy of white men and the subordination of others, especially women.

Expand full comment

Hope, you have a fair point there--one that needs more research to develop. It could justify the work to find the truth.

What scares me is what this unknown "higher authority" might be telling them to think and do--or what they think they are hearing from it!

Too often humans construct and use a 'designer deity' who just happens to think exactly the way they do, prejudices and all....

Expand full comment

What bothers me is the partnership of big money and religion to get one's way, despite the Constitution. I have no problems with religion---personally, I've cut and pasted my own---but the use of faith to manipulate government is insidious and happening right under our noses. It is merely a tool of the very, very, wealthy who want it all. The Kochs, Leonard Leo, and more are the perps.

So their minions allow themselves to take up arms, shut down abortion, kill people of other faiths, suppress other races and ethnicities and mangle the progress of LBGT+ freedoms. But the guys at the helm (above) could care less. Just don't raise corporate taxes or regulate business.

Expand full comment

P.S. This is from today's The Guardian: "A rightwing Christian “hate group” (ADF) that is behind a host of legal efforts to roll back abortion rights, remove anti-LGBTQ+ protections and demonize trans people has had a huge increase in its funding and funneled some of that money to a slew of smaller anti-LGBTQ+ and anti-abortion groups across the US, the Guardian can reveal."

Expand full comment

Gus - I agree completely and it scares me too.

Expand full comment

I happy to call out that it isn’t a legitimate religion.

But then in my opinion all “faith” is simply a brainwashing attempt at a power grab, since there is not and never has been any evidence for the magic sky daddy.

Expand full comment

Religion is the biggest business in the world.

Expand full comment

Amen sister

Expand full comment

They know, but they are deeply in denial.

Expand full comment

I have a different point of view on this: these decisions, along with Shelby, demonstrate that people can be formally very well educated, while remaining profoundly ignorant. Clarence Thomas is the only one of those bastards who’s in denial.

Expand full comment

Thomas resents being black.

Expand full comment

Ignorant or bought?

Expand full comment

And deeply in someone's pockets.

Expand full comment

John, I think you are giving them too much credit.

Expand full comment

I read Harvard's official response to this decision (and my own college, Barnard) and read, "we will abide by your stupid decision but because you allowed a narrow wormhole -- which Roberts denies but is certainly there -- we will look for our applicants to make their case about why race and how it affected them in life experience be a factor in our admission decision. As usual Thomas, who benefited greatly from being Black in his nearly disastrous SC nomination process (remember him saying "this is a high tech lynching"? ) betrays his race. He would likely never been voted in had he NOT been black. Still, it is a decision that comports with nearly everything else this court has done to damage society, including of course, women.

Expand full comment

Thomas benefitted from being Black, but made sure to never help other Blacks move forward in their lives. I think he resents being Black, he is very arrogant, and since he is taking free trips from a billionaire who has interests in the court ruling in his favor, should resign. As for Roberts, Sen. Whitehouse warned us a long time ago that Roberts is not a liberal judge. When conservatives need a majority when the court is split, they can often count on Roberts.

Expand full comment

He is a racist jus like his wife. He says “I got mine screw all the rest of my brothers and sisters”.

Expand full comment

I'm AA like Clarence Thomas, & I don't think he's racist. I do, however, think he has a lot of self hate & has absolutely no loyalty to the AA community. I don't know what happened in his life, but he checked out a long time ago, which is really sad.

Expand full comment

Consider that his wife has spent her whole life l bushing her parents in the most obvious way. Now consider what he must be like to have allowed himself to be that punishment. They are each and both deeply, deeply, disturbed.

Expand full comment

* her whole life punishing her parents

Expand full comment

TerriFY, he's loyal to MONEY....

Expand full comment

That's what I believe as well. Thomas resents being black.

Expand full comment

I think that we should be using the color scale instead of race. No one said color could not be considered and frankly, color is not race. Angelika Dass should have weighed in on the Supreme Court hearings. I think she could have added a piece. Clearly what affirmative action is needs to be redefined. I would say, anyone that got into a university because their skin was considered "White" got affirmative action too. Not to right a wrong of access, but to continue the wrong of access. I think they should use the pantone scale, and get their diversity that way. https://angelicadass.com/photography/humanae/

Some additional ideas for selection. If I were running a university I am sure I would find a way around the Supreme Court ruling. They cannot tell universities that they cannot choose their people by random, or by Pantone. They certainly have managed to replicate the unjust system that they have. I say, just put a number on a pantone and say mix up the school by pantone. It won't be race. It will be color. Perhaps colleges should stop this game of selection and just take the people who apply in a lottery, if they pass the basics for the courses they want to take.

Expand full comment

Thomas highly benefited from affirmative action at every junction in his life. But he doesn't think he's Black or realizes that he's in an interracial marriage that was illegal not too long ago. But clearly the rules of law don't apply to him, since he will have zero consequences for his criminal actions.

Expand full comment

Perfect idea for admissions. A Pantone student body. I would love to hear this court tie itself in knots to undo that.

Expand full comment

Today's decision is another triumph of legalism--when words and concepts of reasoning are used to reach pre-ordained ends that are unconnected to the actual facts. In the end, the law is all about real life. I remember when I first entered Harvard Law School, many years ago. I was struck by the brilliance of my professors (most of them, anyway), but even more by how they dealt with the practical, not the theoretical. The chief justice may admonish his least-senior colleague, but her words will live on long after his are all but forgotten.

Expand full comment

Jon, well said indeed!

Expand full comment

Imagine! Military academys' are exempted! Think the 6 SC justices are still not seeing color?

However, one Democrat, Rep. Jason Crow (D-Colorado) specifically called out the court for the military academy exemption.

Crow shared a screenshot of the Politico article to Twitter, writing, "This decision is deeply upsetting but outright grotesque for exempting military academies. The court is saying diversity shouldn't matter, EXCEPT when deciding who can fight and die for our country—reinforcing the notion that these communities can sacrifice for America but not be full participants in every other way. Justice Jackson is right: 'deeming race irrelevant in law does not make it so in life.'"

Expand full comment

Thank you Maggie. Sotomayor called out the "potentially distinct interest" of military academies for highlighting the extreme "arbitrariness" of this opinion that joins the 1857 'Dred Scott' opinion as the worst ever. I await Joyce's 'Sister-in-Law" HCR's analysis.

Expand full comment

Could this court make it any more obvious - in your face - that they believe the only diversity that matters is in our armed forces? Where the kids (mostly) that we send to the various wars to fight & die - those kids can be diverse and poor. That puts the lie to the whole "racism is over" chant right there. Right there is a billboard!

Expand full comment

I concur Maggje, In fact after every affirmative statement in this 6-3 majority's opinion one must add the phrase "EXCEPT in military Academies", Chief Justice, "the Constitution requires equal protection be colorblind" .... "EXCEPT in military acadamies." What are the next special "exceptions" ?

Expand full comment

You nailed it, Maggie. Agree SCOTUS is ok sending minorities to the killing fields but not to Ivy League schools.

Expand full comment

I would just like to point out that giving the SC points for considering "diversity " in there reasoning to exempt military academies, is to much credit. I think it's just too keep the numbers up in our military. Without the numbers of non-white applicants we would have a very difficult time maintaining our military.

What an egregious decision on so many fronts.

Expand full comment

I was being just a bit sarcastic there, Rex. No diversity in colleges but its dandy to send them to war to fight & die! Certainly made THAT very clear!

Expand full comment

I understand and agree. Just thought trying to maintain diversity shouldn't give the SC any credit. Your point is well taken.

Expand full comment

How far do they want to “go back” as we really have not come forward at all.

Expand full comment
founding

Another sad day for the rule of law. Imho people honestly, blindly, don’t understand how race negatively affects the possibility of a great education BEFORE colleges decide who’s in or who’s not. An injustice has occurred beyond comprehension.

Expand full comment

Possibly, I am naive, but there is so much blatant discrimination of all sorts within the Republican Party and enough visibility of their awfulness, that we voters just might be coming out of a cloud.

Expand full comment
founding

I believe many bigoted individuals were already in our society but where there is permission (Trump) and numbers there is strength. People who believe in fairness/equality/personal rights need to start speaking up, voting, and helping to get out the vote. Beyond the law it's all we've got.

Expand full comment

What is it that conservatives have to celebrate about this decision? All it says to me is that white people no longer have to share their access to a better education with those less fortunate, less rich, or less educated, or a different (I guess they think "less") color. Tell me why this is something to be celebrated?

Expand full comment

Turns out that Judge Jackson is the conscience of the Supreme Court. As for the Republican majority? They have a checklist of what advances they need to turn back. First came Roe v Wade and now the undoing of Affirmative Action for college admissions.

It is interesting to note that the U.S. service academies will keep Affirmative Action because they realize how important it is to have people of all different backgrounds in the military. So I ask you: Why isn't that OK for non-governmental colleges and universities?

Expand full comment

This & the ruling for more religious accommodations at work.

How many businesses will be closing on Sundays because everyone will be " at church"?

Our Supreme Court is completely political. Completely.

Expand full comment

The religious accommodation case is more complex than it may seem. People who spend a lot of time on the issues in that case seem to think that the decision is not a bad one.

Expand full comment

I weep.

Expand full comment

Me too. My heart is broken for young people of color who are already under duress by the psychopaths in the GQP.

Expand full comment

What a sad day. Justices Jackson Brown, Kagen and Sotomayor must be appalled at who they work with. A bunch of privileged people who can’t see what life really is. Sad, sad, sad.

Expand full comment

Ignorance and hate filled justices sitting on the highest court in the land hand down this decision that doesn’t affect them in the least. All the little peons keep hitting their heads against the wall, just trying to survive.

Expand full comment

Perhaps it is time for a Black or Brown student to sue the same institutions for their legacy preferences which overwhelmingly if not entirely benefit non-minority applicants, filling seats that otherwise qualified POC's might fill on merit.

Expand full comment

Rep Jamaal Bowman introduced a bill to prohibit legacy admissions & so did Sen Jeff Merkley. Apparently Sen Tim Scott supports it. Maybe legislation coming w Repub. disdain for ‘elites’.

Expand full comment

And not just "otherwise qualified POCs" but many others who may be better qualified than many legacy students.

Expand full comment

A totally expected ruling, however sad.

I love Justice Thomas pretending he wasn’t the product of affirmative action. He had to overturn it to assure himself he made it into Yale and Monsanto on his own.

Expand full comment

And, the generous affirmative payoffs from the ultra rich inluding vacations on colorblind Yachts.

Expand full comment

"Wallace may have been forced to step aside in 1963, but we need to make sure we don’t go back." Dern Tootin', Joyce. Thanks.

Expand full comment