When the Supreme Court struck down affirmative action programs at the University of North Carolina and Harvard, conservatives celebrated the decision, hailing it as a victory for a “colorblind” interpretation of the Constitution. Former President Donald Trump praised the ruling as a “great day for America.” Democrats, on the other hand, criticized the decision, arguing that affirmative action is essential in addressing historical race discrimination.
Straight Arrow News contributor Robert Doar argues the Left has it wrong and believes the ruling against affirmative action is consistent with America’s ongoing efforts to rectify its discriminatory past.
In the years since the Civil Rights Movement, we witnessed the rise of college admissions policies that put skin color over character and ability. These policies clearly put some citizens before others. Even so, the Supreme Court protected them as recently as 2003. Asian Americans, including the plaintiffs in the Harvard case, were treated most unjustly by these policies. The court found they were discriminated against and overturned affirmative actionon the same grounds as the great cases of the Civil Rights Movement.
Now we can add Justice Roberts’ decision, and Justice Thomas‘ concurrence to the canon of great defenses of equal protection, regardless of race. These documents are consistent with the spirit of the Declaration of Independence, the 14th Amendment, Justice Harlan’s dissent, Brown v. Board of Education, the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act, and Dr. King’s dream. With the Court’s recent decision, we’ve gotten back to our founding principles.
For decades, colleges and universities were allowed to discriminate on the basis of race alone against applicants in the admissions processes. On January 29, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled against this practice of affirmative action in students for fair admissions versus Harvard, and in doing so overturned one of our country’s last vestiges of legal racial discrimination.
Contrary to what some critics have said, the court’s decision to reject affirmative action does not herald the return to the racist era of our country’s past. Rather, it is the continuation of our country’s long and successful struggle against racial discrimination and in favor of equal rights for all. In the courts majority opinion, Chief Justice John Roberts quoted the words of another great Supreme Court Justice John Marshall Harlan in 1896. Justice Harlan was the lone dissenter against the court’s mistaken decision in Plessy versus Ferguson, which protected racial segregation. In his dissent, Justice Harlan wrote in the view of the Constitution, in the eye of the law, there is in this country, no superior, dominant ruling class of citizens. There is no caste here. Our Constitution is colorblind, and neither knows nor tolerates classes among citizens.
I grew up with Justice Harlands dissent ringing in my ears. It was the clarion call of the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division in the Kennedy administration, under Assistant Attorney General Burke Marshall. It was the spirit of the legal struggle for civil rights. The Civil Rights divisions mission was to enforce federal civil rights law and guarantee that African Americans in the South enjoyed equal rights as American citizens and the divisions lawyers, including my father, John Doerr, fought some of the most decisive legal battles to secure civil rights, from voting cases to the integration of universities. This spirit of the Civil Rights Division and the case for equal rights drew on many sources in addition to justice Harlands dissent. Of course, there are the principles expressed in the Declaration of Independence, that all men are created equal and endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights. More recent was the Supreme Court’s 1954 ruling in Brown versus Board of Education that struck down racial segregation in public schools. This decision had been based on the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution, which guarantees all citizens equal protection before the law.
When concurring with Justice Roberts his decision in the affirmative action case, Associate Justice Clarence Thomas highlighted the 14th Amendment, as well as the 13th amendment that abolished slavery. He wrote, the history of these measures enactment, renders their motivating principle as clear as they’re taxed. All citizens of the United States, regardless of skin color, are equal before the law.
Equality before the law was also the motivating principle of the civil rights movement, and its campaign of nonviolent resistance and peaceful protest against racial discrimination in the southern United States. It was the spirit of the leaders who organized the 1963 march on Washington, and countless other demonstrations. And it was the message that Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Delivered from the steps of the Lincoln Memorial on August 28 1963. Dr. King told us then, that his goal was that his children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.
Our country has made great strides toward fulfilling Dr. King’s dream. With the Civil Rights Act of 1964. And the Voting Rights Act of 1965. The federal government put an end to the days of legal segregation, and took decisive action to ensure African Americans right to vote, the spirit of justice Harlands dissent, and our founding documents became the law of the land in most areas of American life, but in one area, we got away from that spirit. In the years since the civil rights movement. We witnessed the rise of college admissions policies that put skin color over character and ability. These policies clearly put some citizens before others. Even so the Supreme Court protected them as recently as 2003. Asian Americans, including the plaintiffs in the Harvard case, were treated most unjustly by these policies. The court found they were discriminated against and overturned affirmative action
on the same grounds as the great cases of the civil rights movement.
Now we can add Justice Roberts decision, and justice Thomas’s concurrence to the canon of great defenses of equal protection, regardless of race. These documents are consistent with the spirit of the Declaration of Independence, the 14th Amendment, just as Harlands dissent, Brown versus Board of Education, the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act, and Dr. King’s dream. With the Court’s recent decision, we’ve gotten back to our founding principles
In addition to the facts, we believe it’s vital to hear perspectives from all sides of the political spectrum. We hope these different voices will help you reach your own conclusions.
The opinions published in this section are solely those of the contributors and do not reflect the views of Straight Arrow News.
Robert Doar
President, American Enterprise Institute
View Video LibraryShare
. . .
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Commentary
Our commentary partners will help you reach your own conclusions on complex topics.
Argentina President-elect Javier Milei is no Donald Trump
9 hrs ago
Peter Zeihan
Why I’m done with Twitter (X) … and Elon Musk
Yesterday
Peter Zeihan
‘It’s their land’: Americans debate Gaza, Israel and Hamas
Yesterday
Dr. Frank Luntz
Small nuclear reactors are not the future of energy
Tuesday
Peter Zeihan
Affirmative action ruling consistent with struggle against US racist past
Aug 3
Share
. . .
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
By Straight Arrow News
When the Supreme Court struck down affirmative action programs at the University of North Carolina and Harvard, conservatives celebrated the decision, hailing it as a victory for a “colorblind” interpretation of the Constitution. Former President Donald Trump praised the ruling as a “great day for America.” Democrats, on the other hand, criticized the decision, arguing that affirmative action is essential in addressing historical race discrimination.
Straight Arrow News contributor Robert Doar argues the Left has it wrong and believes the ruling against affirmative action is consistent with America’s ongoing efforts to rectify its discriminatory past.
In the years since the Civil Rights Movement, we witnessed the rise of college admissions policies that put skin color over character and ability. These policies clearly put some citizens before others. Even so, the Supreme Court protected them as recently as 2003. Asian Americans, including the plaintiffs in the Harvard case, were treated most unjustly by these policies. The court found they were discriminated against and overturned affirmative action on the same grounds as the great cases of the Civil Rights Movement.
Now we can add Justice Roberts’ decision, and Justice Thomas‘ concurrence to the canon of great defenses of equal protection, regardless of race. These documents are consistent with the spirit of the Declaration of Independence, the 14th Amendment, Justice Harlan’s dissent, Brown v. Board of Education, the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act, and Dr. King’s dream. With the Court’s recent decision, we’ve gotten back to our founding principles.
For decades, colleges and universities were allowed to discriminate on the basis of race alone against applicants in the admissions processes. On January 29, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled against this practice of affirmative action in students for fair admissions versus Harvard, and in doing so overturned one of our country’s last vestiges of legal racial discrimination.
Contrary to what some critics have said, the court’s decision to reject affirmative action does not herald the return to the racist era of our country’s past. Rather, it is the continuation of our country’s long and successful struggle against racial discrimination and in favor of equal rights for all. In the courts majority opinion, Chief Justice John Roberts quoted the words of another great Supreme Court Justice John Marshall Harlan in 1896. Justice Harlan was the lone dissenter against the court’s mistaken decision in Plessy versus Ferguson, which protected racial segregation. In his dissent, Justice Harlan wrote in the view of the Constitution, in the eye of the law, there is in this country, no superior, dominant ruling class of citizens. There is no caste here. Our Constitution is colorblind, and neither knows nor tolerates classes among citizens.
I grew up with Justice Harlands dissent ringing in my ears. It was the clarion call of the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division in the Kennedy administration, under Assistant Attorney General Burke Marshall. It was the spirit of the legal struggle for civil rights. The Civil Rights divisions mission was to enforce federal civil rights law and guarantee that African Americans in the South enjoyed equal rights as American citizens and the divisions lawyers, including my father, John Doerr, fought some of the most decisive legal battles to secure civil rights, from voting cases to the integration of universities. This spirit of the Civil Rights Division and the case for equal rights drew on many sources in addition to justice Harlands dissent. Of course, there are the principles expressed in the Declaration of Independence, that all men are created equal and endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights. More recent was the Supreme Court’s 1954 ruling in Brown versus Board of Education that struck down racial segregation in public schools. This decision had been based on the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution, which guarantees all citizens equal protection before the law.
When concurring with Justice Roberts his decision in the affirmative action case, Associate Justice Clarence Thomas highlighted the 14th Amendment, as well as the 13th amendment that abolished slavery. He wrote, the history of these measures enactment, renders their motivating principle as clear as they’re taxed. All citizens of the United States, regardless of skin color, are equal before the law.
Equality before the law was also the motivating principle of the civil rights movement, and its campaign of nonviolent resistance and peaceful protest against racial discrimination in the southern United States. It was the spirit of the leaders who organized the 1963 march on Washington, and countless other demonstrations. And it was the message that Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Delivered from the steps of the Lincoln Memorial on August 28 1963. Dr. King told us then, that his goal was that his children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.
Our country has made great strides toward fulfilling Dr. King’s dream. With the Civil Rights Act of 1964. And the Voting Rights Act of 1965. The federal government put an end to the days of legal segregation, and took decisive action to ensure African Americans right to vote, the spirit of justice Harlands dissent, and our founding documents became the law of the land in most areas of American life, but in one area, we got away from that spirit. In the years since the civil rights movement. We witnessed the rise of college admissions policies that put skin color over character and ability. These policies clearly put some citizens before others. Even so the Supreme Court protected them as recently as 2003. Asian Americans, including the plaintiffs in the Harvard case, were treated most unjustly by these policies. The court found they were discriminated against and overturned affirmative action
on the same grounds as the great cases of the civil rights movement.
Now we can add Justice Roberts decision, and justice Thomas’s concurrence to the canon of great defenses of equal protection, regardless of race. These documents are consistent with the spirit of the Declaration of Independence, the 14th Amendment, just as Harlands dissent, Brown versus Board of Education, the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act, and Dr. King’s dream. With the Court’s recent decision, we’ve gotten back to our founding principles
Affirmative action ruling consistent with struggle against US racist past
When the Supreme Court struck down affirmative action programs at the University of North Carolina and Harvard, conservatives celebrated the decision, hailing it as a victory for a “colorblind” interpretation of the Constitution. Former President Donald Trump praised the ruling as a “great day for America.” Democrats, on the other hand, criticized the decision, arguing
Aug 3
End of pandemic SNAP benefits a chance to improve food program
Millions of struggling American families in 32 states are now receiving less federal aid to buy food as the emergency funding for the SNAP food stamps program has expired. The emergency allotment, spurred by the COVID-19 outbreak, boosted the money that recipients received by at least $95 per month from SNAP, which stands for “supplemental
Mar 9
Census data paints an inaccurate picture of inequality in America
The U.S. Census Bureau is a nonpartisan government agency, responsible for not only determining how many representatives each state will have in Congress for the next 10 years, but also for collecting income data. By asking about income, the Bureau’s intent is to “help communities enroll eligible families in programs designed to assist them.” But
Sep 22
Elites have lost the trust and confidence of Americans
The Cambridge Dictionary defines the liberal elite as “a group of people with education, money, and other advantages, often living in cities, who have liberal political views and are seen as not understanding the problems and views of ordinary people.” Former President Donald Trump’s war on elites was central to his 2016 campaign and could be weaponized again should he run in 2024. Straight Arrow News
Aug 5
American men need to start taking more personal responsibility
Some members of the Republican party, such as former President Donald Trump and Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO), blame Democrats for starting a war against American men. These voices want government action taken to protect men from policies meant to undermine their roles in society. But is government intervention really the answer? Straight Arrow News contributor Robert
Jun 23
Media Miss
Stories each side is underreporting
Anti-Abortion Medical Groups Sue to Stop Washington Inquiry
6 sources | 0% from the left
AP Images
Georgia Republicans advance House and Senate maps as congressional proposal waits in the wings
20 sources | 6% from the right
Getty Images
Latest Stories
Reuters
SpaceX launches S. Korean spy satellite days after North’s launch
Watch 1:18
2 hrs ago
Axios
Ex-Google CEO warns of AI threats to humanity within 5-10 years
Watch 1:28
3 hrs ago
AP Images
New York City officials consider first US congestion pricing program
Watch 1:54
3 hrs ago
Reuters
Filipino coast guard builds station in contested South China Sea
Watch 1:49
5 hrs ago
Getty Images
Texas sues Pfizer, says company lied about efficacy of COVID vaccine
Watch 1:53
6 hrs ago
Popular Opinions
In addition to the facts, we believe it’s vital to hear perspectives from all sides of the political spectrum.
Biden losing support of Black Americans, identity politics is to blame
5 hrs ago
Star Parker
Trump’s push to prosecute Capitol Police reveals anti-democracy stance
6 hrs ago
Dr. Rashad Richey
Viral Big Mac video is misleading as inflation cools
Yesterday
Jordan Reid
To address poverty, tax the rich and vote blue
Wednesday
Adrienne Lawrence
Latest Opinions
In addition to the facts, we believe it’s vital to hear perspectives from all sides of the political spectrum. We hope these different voices will help you reach your own conclusions.
The opinions published in this section are solely those of the contributors and do not reflect the views of Straight Arrow News.
Dr. Rashad Richey
National TV Political Analyst, Talk Radio Host, Univ. Prof.Star Parker
Founder & President, Center for Urban Renewal and EducationWeekly Voices
Monday
David Pakman
Host of The David Pakman ShowLarry Lindsey
President & CEO, The Lindsey GroupTuesday
Ruben Navarrette
Columnist, host & authorBen Weingarten
Federalist Senior Contributor; Claremont Institute FellowWednesday
Adrienne Lawrence
Legal analyst, law professor & award-winning authorNewt Gingrich
Former House Speaker; Chairman of Gingrich 360Thursday
Jordan Reid
Author; Founding Editor, Ramshackle GlamTimothy Carney
Timothy Carney, Senior Fellow, American Enterprise InstituteOther AEI Contributors
John Fortier
Katherine Zimmerman
Matthew Continetti
Robert Doar
Friday
Dr. Rashad Richey
National TV Political Analyst, Talk Radio Host, Univ. Prof.Star Parker
Founder & President, Center for Urban Renewal and EducationPolitics
Sen. Rand Paul performs Heimlich maneuver on choking colleague
12 hrs ago
Tommy Tuberville says military holds could be resolved in about a week
Henry Kissinger dies at 100: The Morning Rundown, Nov. 30, 2023
Getty Images
U.S.
SpaceX launches S. Korean spy satellite days after North’s launch
2 hrs ago
Texas sues Pfizer, says company lied about efficacy of COVID vaccine
Dave Chappelle asked to write George Santos joke, here’s his response
Reuters
International
Filipino coast guard builds station in contested South China Sea
5 hrs ago
Airstrikes resume in Gaza as cease-fire ends: The Morning Rundown, Dec. 1, 2023
Anti-immigration signs spark hate crime probes in Northern Ireland
Reuters
Tech
Ex-Google CEO warns of AI threats to humanity within 5-10 years
3 hrs ago
Judge blocks Montana TikTok ban from taking effect Jan. 1
It’s ChatGPT’s birthday. Here’s how it changed the AI game in 1 short year.
Axios