Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson strongly criticized her colleagues for their decision to strike down race-conscious college admissions policies, accusing the majority of regressing on affirmative action. In her dissenting opinion on the major court ruling, Jackson expressed her disdain for the majority’s approach of enforcing “colorblindness for all” through legal means, referring to it as a misguided attempt to disregard the significance of race in society.
Jackson made it clear that while the law may declare race as irrelevant, it remains an influential factor in people’s lives. She emphasized the persistence of race-based gaps that originated centuries ago and continue to exist today. As the latest addition to the court and the first Black woman to serve as a justice, Jackson lambasted the conservative majority for not only ignoring the nation’s historical and ongoing racial discrimination, but also hindering the progress made by academic institutions in addressing these societal issues.
According to Jackson, the majority’s perspective is rooted in the naive belief that eliminating race as a consideration will lead to an end to racism. She cautioned that colleges cannot simply ignore a crucial aspect of individuals’ experiences, as this would only perpetuate the persistence of racism. Jackson argued that race-conscious college admissions policies have numerous societal benefits, such as strengthening the U.S. workforce and promoting diversity in business leadership. She outlined how a less diverse pipeline to top positions further widens racial disparities, exacerbating existing inequalities in a society that already distributes prestige and privilege based on race.
Vice President Kamala Harris encouraged reading Justice Brown’s dissent, admiring her logical reasoning, historical knowledge, and clear thinking regarding the past and future of the country. Harris criticized the court’s failure to fully comprehend the importance of equal opportunity for all Americans, clarifying that the issue at hand is not about being colorblind but about disregarding history. As the first Black woman to serve as vice president, Harris stressed the misnomer in suggesting that the ruling promotes colorblindness when, in reality, it contributes to a lack of acknowledgment of historical context.
The ruling in question involved two separate cases concerning affirmative action policies at Harvard University and the University of North Carolina. Jackson recused herself from the Harvard case due to her role on Harvard’s Board of Overseers, but she dissented in the UNC case. Justice Sonia Sotomayor also delivered a scathing dissent, warning that the decision would perpetuate racial segregation in higher education and allow racial inequality to persist. Both dissents were supported by Justice Elena Kagan.
The majority held that Harvard and UNC’s admissions programs violated the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment. Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for the majority, emphasized that admissions programs should not use race in a manner that perpetuates racial stereotypes or lacks clear boundaries. However, he did mention that universities can consider race within the context of an applicant’s individual experiences, such as instances of discrimination or inspiration.
The liberal justices disagreed with the majority’s interpretation of the Constitution, expressing concerns about the negative consequences and the failure to recognize the progress needed for equal protection. Jackson specifically addressed conservative Justice Clarence Thomas, who accused her of attributing nearly all life outcomes to race. Jackson dismissed Thomas’s assertions as baseless and unsupported, highlighting his reliance on straw man arguments in her dissenting footnote.
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.
