Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson’s dissenting opinion in the recent affirmative action decision has received criticism for flawed claims regarding Black infant mortality rates under the care of White doctors. Jackson argued that race-based admissions are a matter of life and death for racial minorities, using an example of the impact of diversity on Black newborns. However, the law firm responsible for the misleading statement sought to provide clarification, stating that racial concordance between patients and physicians led to a reduction in health inequity, but survival and mortality rates are not statistically interchangeable.
Legal experts have pointed out the mathematical error in Jackson’s claim, emphasizing that the study on which it is based does not support her assertion of significantly higher survival rates. The flawed nature of the study and the mischaracterization by interested parties have raised concerns about using such data in Supreme Court cases. Critics argue that this practice creates a legislative environment and can result in major decisions or dissents based on contested factual assertions.
In the landmark affirmative action ruling, the Supreme Court voted 6-3 to end race-based admissions in universities. Chief Justice John Roberts emphasized that admissions should be based on a student’s unique ability to contribute to the university, rather than their heritage or culture.
Denial of responsibility! VigourTimes is an automatic aggregator of Global media. In each content, the hyperlink to the primary source is specified. All trademarks belong to their rightful owners, and all materials to their authors. For any complaint, please reach us at – [email protected]. We will take necessary action within 24 hours.
