The United States Supreme Court tackled the issue in the seminal case of Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, 438 US 265 (1978). In that case, the Court found that race could only be one of numerous factors in determining admission to a university. It stated that the University of California policy was unconstitutional, but that the policy used by Harvard was a valid type of affirmative action. The result was that Mr. Bakke was admitted to medical school and became a respected physician.
Since that time, there have been many more challenges to the doctrine, some of which were successful and some of which failed. In my opinion, yesterday the Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision basically eliminated affirmative action or reverse discrimination whatever you want to call it.
In the case of Ricci v. Destefano, the Supreme Court held that an affirmative action policy by the City of New Haven, Connecticut was invalid. The litigation began when the City tossed out the results of a promotion exam because too few minority members passed. Accordingly, the white firemen who did pass the test were not promoted.
The Court ruled that the white firemen who did pass the test should have been promoted. Four justices in dissent felt otherwise. The dissenting opinion was written by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg who stated that although the court felt sorry for the passing firemen, it wasn’t enough.
Hopefully, this decision puts the final nail in the coffin of reverse discrimination which is anything but fair to either side. By definition, it is discrimination. Anything that puts one group above another is discrimination whether it is to make up for past wrongs or not. What has happened in the past is past. What matters now is the future. And, in the future of the United States, there should not be discrimination of any kind, reverse or otherwise. These policies have lived past their time, if, in fact, they ever actually had a time.
But, this case is interesting on other grounds besides what it may mean to affirmative action. The Supreme Court, by deciding as it did, was overruling a decision in which Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotamayor took part. Does this mean her nomination is in jeopardy? I think not, but it does mean that she should be more carefully examined by the Senate. Remember, this is the woman who stated that her rich cultural background as a Puerto Rican woman would qualify her more to decide certain types of cases than a white man.
Maybe, she is the one who is guilty of discrimination and being racially biased. I do not believe that the Senate should give her a free ride. She should be examined very carefully before being put on the bench.
Is the EPA Hiding Evidence on Global Warming?
A report came out yesterday that the EPA could possibly be covering up evidence that global warming does not exist in order to allow President Obama to get his environmental agenda through Congress. Senator Inhofe of Oklahoma has begun talking about initiating an investigation into this and possibly taking the EPA and anyone else involved to task. Further, he has stated that the controversial legislation which passed the House last week would be dead on arrival in the Senate.
In fact, the stated Legislation had a number of more conservative Democrats vote against it. And, if it weren’t for a handful of Republicans that voted with the President, it would have failed in the House and never even have gone to the Senate.
The alleged EPA report says that Global Warming does not exist and, in fact, there is evidence that global temperatures might actually be lower than those averages of the last Century. If this is true, then why would anyone want to cover it up? The answer is very simple: The Liberals want to pass sweeping environmental legislation that could potentially harm the economy and they do not want any legitimate reason for it to fail.
If there is any evidence whatsoever that Global Warming is a fraud, then the Legislation would not have a chance. In fact, the legislation in question here, if passed, will cause loss of employment and additional taxes. In order for a majority of Congress to succeed on this legislation, the President, Ms. Pelosi and their other cohorts must have no evidence whatsoever against them.
I think that Senator Inhofe should follow through on his investigation wherever it may lead. If this report is true that there is a cover-up, it will not bode well for Mr. Obama’s Administration or the EPA. And, based upon the current state of the multi-trillion dollar health care plan, Mr. Obama can not lose on this environmental legislation. It would mean that two of his major policy goals would have been defeated. Unfortunately for him, they would be going away for the right reasons.
And, as for Global Warming, we all know how much money Al Gore has made off of it, probably more than 100 million dollars. Maybe, he should do his share by staying off of private jets?