Will Supreme Court Affirmative Action Case End Reverse Discrimination

By | October 11, 2012

Race based affirmative action  may come to a screeching halt and finally put an end to decades of reverse discriminatory policies utilized in higher educational institutions. This week, the U.S. Supreme Court took up arguments concerning a case brought by Abigail Fisher, a white applicant who was denied admission to the University of Texas (UT) at Austin in 2008. Fisher is challenging UT-Austin’s decision to use a race-conscious admission plan which considers race as a factor in admitting students to its incoming freshman class.

Instead of using a fairer race-neutral plan, which Texas law already guarantees the top 10 percent of high school students in their graduating class admission to the university, UT-Austin, went a step further. It used an unnecessary and highly unfair reverse discrimination practice of considering race as a factor for admittance, thus making the purpose for the race neutral Texas law meaningless.

The problem which Miss Fisher and any other high school applicant in Texas and in any other community in America has to consider, is will they be admitted based upon their academic ability, content of their character or any other measurable qualities?

Or, will their years of academic pursuit and hard work be rendered fruitless, because the student was denied access based upon their race? In a nation where there is a black president, and where diversity is clearly present in major industries, in academics, and other professions, is reverse discriminatory denial of educational access to white Americans, fair, right, just or even legal?

Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., gave America his take on this nearly fifty years ago, and his words have the answer which must guide the U.S. Supreme Court’s legal and moral determination of this case. Rev. King stated with moral clarity and conciseness in his 1963 “I have a Dream” speech, “I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character. I have a dream today!”

When is the time to make real the promises of Democracy? When does America finally become one nation and not an America divided by a two-tier system? Where is the end?

In 2003, former U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor wrote the majority court opinion in the University of Michigan Law School Grutter v. Bollinger decision. She concluded that universities would need 25 years until they ended their race-conscious admissions policies.

Justice O’Connor was wrong in 2003 and her discriminatory decision and conclusions muse be reversed now. Here is why her conclusions are in error and unnecessarily deprives honorable achieving students like Miss Fisher her rightful seat at the TU-Austin.

O’Connor stipulated in the Grutter v. Bollinger decision, that race-conscious admissions policies were constitutional because they serve a “compelling state interest of promoting diversity and its associated educational benefits.”

The question has to be, racial diversity of whom and associated educational benefits for whom. Certainly Justice O’Connor and the NAACP and the liberals who backed the University of Michigan could not have been talking about the poor and low income black students, who never made the affirmative action cut. Surely, Justice O’Connor could not have been referring to providing an educational seat at the table to the black students whose parents see their kids stripped of their self worth by an educational system run by blacks, led by blacks, and run to ruin by blacks.

No, no and no again!

Justice “O’Connor’s decision in 2003 left intact a discriminatory system that only largely benefited students from well connected or very affluent black families. In fact, William Joyce Wilson, a noted black social research scientist, at the Kennedy School and the Department of Sociology at Harvard University, has concluded that affirmative action has actually been a very ineffective tool for the truly disadvantaged, and marginally beneficial for the minority working class.

So again, why is affirmative action still used to discriminate against white students? It is a matter of politics.

If a lie is said often enough, it will become the truth when left unchallenged. Affirmative action is the new slavery. It is the new second-tier of citizenship, where fear, smear and misrepresentation is used in the black community to convince followers of democrat machine promises that affirmative action will help poor and low income blacks up the ladder of success.

Yet black mothers and fathers should seriously consider this. When was the last time you saw a white person stand in front of your child in school to keep him from learning? When was the last time you saw a white person stand in front of your child and told him to commit a crime? When was the last time that you saw a white person stand in front of your child and told him not to study, not to get good grades, not to try harder, not to do better, not to be better and not to succeed?

Abigail Fisher, in Texas does not keep your child from excelling in school. Abigail Fisher’s parents and parents like them in Michigan, Ohio, Florida, Virginia, Wisconsin, South Carolina, or any other state are not keeping your child from learning, from achieving from realizing the American Dream. So why are you letting Affirmative Action and its discriminatory use block Abigail Fisher’s opportunity at the American Dream?

Unions, and democrat machines in Detroit, Chicago, Cleveland, Los Angeles, New York, Atlanta, and many other major cities, have hoodwinked blacks and minorities into believing that whites are maintaining discriminatory practices that keep their families, their children, and their educational systems and children shackled to poverty, high school dropout rates, crime and sky rocketing illegitimate births.

These insidious notions must end.

Affirmative Action is and to a large part will always be a tool that is used to create a divide between whites, blacks and other minorities. Democrats, poverty pimps, and so called civil rights activists and organizations use affirmative action to skim millions of dollars from guilt-ridden white liberals who want to “do the right thing” because the Jesse Jacksons and Al Sharptons of America have raised the “slavery” boogieman.

Well, Al and Jesse that tired old slavery boogieman won’t hunt any longer. No matter how many sad sack stories and anecdotes that you drum up, white people and black people and Americans period, will reject this emotion driven discrimination.

The U.S. Supreme Court must come to the only conclusion that makes moral, logical and principled sense and bring about a game change to Supreme Court Justice O’ Connor’s decision 2003. When will Affirmative Action end? It cannot be put off 14 more years, 4 more years or even one more year.

It must end here with this court and it must ends now, so that the legacy of slavery and white guilt can die together and America can become one United States, and one nation under God.

Now is the time to make real the promises of democracy, so that America will let true colorblind freedom ring and the nation can become truly and completely free at last.

Let me know what you think – ( Click )

Category: In The News Politics Top Political News Tags: , , , ,

About Kevin Fobbs

Kevin Fobbs is the former Community Concerns columnist for 12 years with The Detroit News covering community, family relations, domestic abuse, education, government relations, education, and dispute resolution. He has written for "Michigan Chronicle," “GOPUSA”, Fobbs was government and civic affairs director for SoulSource, a Christian news magazine, and host of The Kevin Fobbs Show www.kevinfobbs.com. He has written as the Christian and Culture examiner for Ann Arbor Examiner: http://www.examiner.com/x-33782-Ann-Arbor-Christianity--Culture-Examiner, and Ann Arbor and Cleveland Conservative Examiner: http://www.examiner.com/conservative-in-ann-arbor/kevin-fobbs His weekly faith-based Hearken The Watchmen column provides insight and answers on family, faith, and how to arrive at faith-based solutions to life challenges. His e-How articles range from, legal, health and education to electronic and culture and entertainment as well as home and business. Served 12 year as a gubernatorial appointee for Michigan’s Wayne County Social Services Board. He worked primarily on parenting and early childhood educational policy, domestic violence, family and children protection policy concerns. Developed programs to help parents develop healthy coping skills in the raising of their children. Was extensively involved in developing parental and child, family support networks at the local, county, and federal level. Kevin Fobbs has more than 35 years of wide-ranging experience as a community and tenant organizer, Legal Services outreach program director, public relations consultant, business executive, gubernatorial and presidential appointee, political advisor, writer, and national lecturer. He has been in the forefront of communications initiatives; devised and implemented strategies to win political and public support for client public policy issues and positions; directed electoral campaigns; and spearheaded as well as managed state and regional referendum, electoral, White House Initiatives, including Education, Social Security, Welfare Reform. Faith-Based Initiatives and many others. Kevin is co-chair and co-founder of AC-3 (American-Canadian Conservative Coalition) that focuses on issues on both sides of the border between the two countries. The American – Canadian Conservative Coalition (AC3) is a joint effort by grassroots Americans and Canadians to share information, issues, and policies that affect us individually and jointly. AC3 members are politically conservative and share the ideals of self-sufficiency, fair business competition, strong families, and joint homeland security. Above all, we believe in the right to freely exercise our chosen religion based on the principles that recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law outlined in the founding documents of our country.

Conservative Daily News allows a great deal of latitude in the topics contributors choose and their approaches to the content. We believe that citizens have a voice - one that should be heard above the mass media. Readers will likely not agree with every contributor or every post, but find reasons to think about the topic and respond with comments. We value differing opinions as well as those that agree. Opinions of contributors are their own and do not necessarily reflect those of CDN, Anomalous Media or staff. Click here if you'd like to write for CDN.
Put This Story in your Circles and Share with your Friends

3 thoughts on “Will Supreme Court Affirmative Action Case End Reverse Discrimination

    1. janbrown

      Jon, I can’t tell by your comment if we just aren’t on the same page w/ this issue or If I’m totally missing something. My comment meant that the needle hasn’t moved & we are still experiencing the same divisive actions. Do you not feel that there is discrimination & that it often divides the people?

  1. janbrown

    This ‘incident’ is proof positive that “We have NOT come a long way” In the mid to late ’70’s there was a reverse discrimination case against UCLA Medical School. There was a white male student denied admission to Medical School despite boasting a 4.0 average from H.S. & a 3.? his inital 4 yrs in college. He learned that a black student with a much lesser grade results had been admited. His suit made it to State Supreme Court where he was ruled against. I escaped California aqbout that time & didn’t follow beyond that…hmmm “the more things change, the more they remain the same”

Comments are closed.