您现在的位置是:半岛新闻网 > 关于我们
The Supreme Court is destroying the legacy of Brown v. Board of Education.
半岛新闻网2024-09-21 23:23:31【关于我们】7人已围观
简介This is part of Opinionpalooza, Slate’s coverage of the major decisions from the Supreme Court this
This is part of Opinionpalooza, Slate’s coverage of the major decisions from the Supreme Court this June. We consider this piece so essential that we’re making it free for all readers. Sign up for the pop-up newsletter to receive our latest updates, and support our groundbreaking work when you join Slate Plus.
There was little suspense surrounding the outcome of the challenge to race-conscious admissions at Harvard College and the University of North Carolina, handed down by the Supreme Court on Thursday. A majority of the justices on this court have indicated in one way or another, over the course of several decades, that they are opposed to race-conscious admissions. And each of these justices have shown near-lockstep adherence to the right-wing project of upending the infrastructure of Civil Rights measures that have been working to confront and frustrate the legacy of this nation’s white supremacist history.
Nevertheless, Thursday’s decision by the Supreme Court striking down the use of race-conscious admissions at Harvard and UNC was no less devastating for being expected. The destructive force of the majority opinion is not only that it removes the ability of critical institutions of our democracy to directly recognize the significance of race as they build educational communities where students can learn from and about one another’s experiences and perspectives. The majority opinion’s shattering destruction, its cruelty even, lies in its cynical ahistoricism, the weakness of its analysis, its manipulation of precedent, all in service of the completion of a project undertaken by conservatives—and begun on this court decades ago—to dismantle the legal framework that supports even the most modest efforts to level the playing field for those who have been most marginalized in our country.
The court is on a mission, and the more transparently it betrays the aims of that mission, the more we must confront the danger in which this democracy finds itself. This court is also reckless in its zeal. This means that the methods it uses in furtherance of its mission are crude, shortsighted, thin, and thus easily exposed to charges of illegitimacy. The scope of the court’s hubris is breathtaking. It supplants its judgment over that of the most prestigious educational institutions in the country, as well as 74 major American companies that filed amicus briefs to the court, including Microsoft, Verizon, Starbucks, and American Express.
AdvertisementRelated From Slate
Richard L. Hasen
There’s a Time Bomb in Progressives’ Big Supreme Court Voting Case Win
Read MoreIt is not just that the court runs roughshod over the judgment of these institutions that engage with young people every day and that control the pathways to access and opportunity for so many Americans. Or that the court diminishes the effort of universities to build a diverse learning environment as mere “commendable goals.” It is that this court reduces an assessment of that project to middle school math—demanding instruments of measure for the goals of affirmative action (even after previously discarding such measures), exalting a “two-step” approach, and lamenting the absence of an end date for affirmative action measures. As though fostering the robust exchange of ideas, supporting innovative problem-solving, and developing students equipped to lead in a multiracial democracy is legitimate only when subject to metes and bounds and a forecast due date, lest we, as a democracy, miss more pressing engagements.
Advertisement Advertisement Advertisement AdvertisementIn its haste to reach a conclusion that was inevitable from the day these cases were filed, the majority makes a mockery of stare decisis once again, turning its back on a succession of its own cases—the most recent in 2016—that have upheld affirmative action in university admissions. Time’s up, this court says, simply because there is new personnel, and so it can.
Likewise, the court brushes aside the extensive trial records accumulated in both the Harvard and UNC cases, and the more than 100 pages of findings of the trial courts in each case. The effect of this is to leave in place the misinformation that has dogged this case about whether Harvard’s or UNC’s admissions practices discriminate against Asian American students. The voluminous trial court record and decision each found that they do not. But the court can’t be bothered to fully engage the record and to clarify the falseness of the charge leveled against these institutions. And thus our discourse about race-conscious admissions will remain degraded, ahistorical, factually incorrect, and lacking in context.
AdvertisementBut perhaps the most grotesque aspect of the majority’s opinion lies in its determination to drain the moral and legal force of the Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Brown v. Board of Education, which it uses as cover for its anti-equality project. The idea that it is Brownthat blocks the path to the use of race as one factor in a holistic assessment of college applicants, rather than the relentless conservative attacks on the very access to opportunity that Brownchampioned, is a shameful exercise in gaslighting. The majority has found Brownuseful as cover for its most extreme opinions. Last year, Justice Samuel Alito cited Brownas the justification for upending stare decisis in the Dobbscase overturning the constitutional right to an abortion. On its current course, the Supreme Court’s removal of context or history from its articulation of Brown’s meaning will leave Browna case that changed the course of American democracy as a Civil Rights decision in name only, stripped of its powerful equality demand and rejection of white supremacy, its shell useful only to justify the extremes of the right-wing agenda.
Advertisement AdvertisementPopular in News & Politics
- A Supreme Court Justice Gave Us Alarming New Evidence That He’s Living in MAGA World
- Ten Years Ago, His Book about Civilizational Collapse Got Unexpectedly Popular. He’s Back With a Little Bit of Hope.
- We’ve Been Entertaining an Illusion About the Supreme Court. It’s Finally Been Shattered.
- Them Supreme Court Boys Are at It Again
Thursday’s decision leaves me with this stark realization. This Supreme Court’s decision-making bears a striking and dangerous likeness to that of the court’s post-Reconstruction 19th- and early 20th-century period. From its decision in Shelby v. Holder(denying the record of ongoing discrimination in voting that justified the reauthorization of the Voting Rights Act) to Comcast(weakening Section 1981 of the Civil Rights Act, which was designed to protect Black people against economic discrimination) to today’s ruling. Compare, for example, Justice Bradley’s lament in 1883 in the Civil Rights Cases(how long must the Negro be “the special favorite of the laws”?) to Chief Justice John Roberts today, appearing to have carefully counted out every minute since the court’s decision upholding affirmative action in Grutter(“twenty years later, no end is in sight”). Taken together in reasoning and consequence, this court’s 21st-century Civil Rights decisions are increasingly reminiscent of the 19th-century court’s steady weakening of the potential and promise of the 14thAmendment to the Constitution to provide the tools we needed then, and still need today, to create the multiracial democracy that the Framers of the Civil War amendments recognized would be this country’s last, best hope for survival.
Tweet Share Share Comment很赞哦!(14129)
上一篇: To Russia, with Love
下一篇: Giant dual
相关文章
- Apple to start manufacturing iPhone Pro in India, report claims
- Facebook pauses Instagram Kids because it was actually a bad idea
- 市公安局信息化管理队伍做法受到省公安厅肯定
- How Bob Marley’s daughter brought Jamaica to Women’s World Cup
- What Ever Happened to Winamp?
- 'IT: Chapter Two' gets a release date and it's sooner than you think
- Russian Twitter bots boosted baseless voter fraud claims in Germany
- 我省2013年普通高校招收保送生4月5日前填志愿
- 科创筑梦树立远大志向 蓄势赋能培养科技人才
- 收入年年有增长 生活年年有变化
热门文章
站长推荐
应对高温 户外驿站送清凉
Lady Gaga may be a superstar, but her new documentary makes her struggles extremely relatable
North Korea's new suspected COVID
Teachers come after TikTok and Facebook over 'devious licks'
Pakistan to host South Africa before ICC Women’s T20 World Cup
你了解你的信用记录吗?
N. Korea lashes out at closer security ties among S. Korea, US, Japan
'IT: Chapter Two' gets a release date and it's sooner than you think