If you are a scumbag loser that was hoping you would not be responsible for paying back your student loans, think again. The Supreme Court justices struck down Biden’s long-delayed student loan relief program, which would have allowed eligible borrowers to cancel up to $20,000 in debt and was estimated to cost more than $400 billion. The program has been blocked since the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals issued a temporary hold in October. If you are like this writer, and millions of others that took out loans and paid them back, you have to be taken aback by the sanity of it all. The Biden plan was stupid, and nothing more than a wealth distribution scheme. Why should someone that made sound financial decisions be responsible for the mistakes of some dopes?
For those of you that feel academic excellence, not race, “should be prioritized” in college admissions, the high court sent you a win. The Supreme Court on Thursday struck down affirmative action in college admissions, declaring race cannot be a factor and forcing institutions of higher education to look for new ways to achieve diverse student bodies.
The court’s conservative majority effectively overturned cases reaching back 45 years in invalidating admissions plans at Harvard and the University of North Carolina, the nation’s oldest private and public colleges, respectively.
Five years ago when the case went to trial, the Harvard Crimson reported on the Ivy League school’s admission data. The paper showed that Asian students who applied to Harvard produced the highest average standardized test scores among applicant demographics, yet had the lowest admission rate. Black applicants, on the other hand, had the lowest average standardized test scores, but enjoyed the highest admission rate.
As CNN legal analyst Elie Honig explained, what the Supreme Court objected to was not diversity per se, but admission boards giving “specific numerical bump [in admissions] based on race.”
“What I think is really interesting is there is a recognition here … that racial diversity is a virtue, it is a value. They’re not saying it’s a bad thing or it’s meaningless,” Honig explained of the Supreme Court’s decision. “The question is: What are the constitutional means to get there?”
The answer to that question, Justice Clarence Thomas suggested, is to honor the “colorblind” Constitution.
In his concurring opinion in the case, Thomas acknowledged that American society is not “colorblind.” But that reality should not prevent our laws from being race-neutral, he argued.
“Racialism simply cannot be undone by different or more racialism,” Thomas wrote.
“This vision of meeting social racism with government-imposed racism is thus self-defeating, resulting in a never-ending cycle of victimization,” he observed. “In the wake of the Civil War, the Framers of the Fourteenth Amendment charted a way out: a colorblind Constitution that requires the government to, at long last, put aside its citizens’ skin color and focus on their individual achievements.”
About the Author
Does that mean I get reparations for not being hired/delayed employment by the Virginia State Police, denied promotions in the Dept. of Corrections and denied advancements in the local government criminal justice system?
Not asking for a friend but asking for me!
The boot is on the other foot now! Now give me my money!!!