Upholding Ending Affirmative Action Leads To The Tantrums Of The Clowns

The Supreme Court rightly upheld Proposal 2 of 2006 that added to the Michigan Constitution that public institutions cannot use race to discriminate or give preferential treatment to groups or individuals.

Now there's much wailing and gnashing of teeth from the self-proclaimed anti-racist progressive left here in Michigan.

First, we get Laura Berman's puff-piece in the Detroit News warning that Affirmative action ruling jeopardizes Michigan's progress against inequality

Short on you know, facts, the piece gives some fun quotes:

“I am deeply saddened and disappointed by this decision,” says Jocelyn Benson, interim dean at Wayne State University Law School. “Any state has been given the green light to ban affirmative action if the voters so choose.”

Had the Supreme Court struck down Michigan’s ban, “we would have revisited our policies to take a more holistic view of our applicants.”

Holistic of course being a euphemism for focusing on skin color. Which, to the race merchants is very holistic indeed and clearly determinative of the rightness of admitting or barring the admission of a student.

Apparently banning discrimination based on race will in Berman's words:

affirms the right of the people of Michigan to close doors that once swung open. And it points toward the closing of an era of social remedies, including affirmative action in education, despite the persistence of inequality.

So banning racial discrimination will close doors? really? Not to mention the laughable concept of social remedies - that you deserve to be either discriminated against or in favor of based not on what you did but what some group you are a part of based solely on your skin color may or may not have done in the past, and before you were born.

On top of that, the lawyer for BAMN then went off into far-leftist land with this inane statement:

“At the very moment that America is becoming a majority minority nation, this court is declaring its intention to uphold white privilege and to create a new Jim Crow legal system,” she said in a statement.

Can anyone parse that one out? Banning discrimination based on race upholds "white privilege" and prohibiting discrimination will create a "Jim Crow" legal system? Does she even understand that what she said and how it's rather contradictory?

But not to worry fans of social and group racial determination uber alles, the University of Michigan has pledged to work hard to ensure diversity by again, focusing on race where it can still get away with it:

We remain committed to the goal of a diverse, academically excellent student body, and will continue to seek to achieve that goal in ways that comply with the law.”

After talks with the Black Student Union, U-M agreed last week to initiatives aimed at increasing black enrollment and improving the campus climate for minority students. The school will partner with black students at university-sponsored events that encourage African-Americans who have been admitted to U-M to enroll.

U-M also will launch a pilot transportation project for black students living in more affordable housing outside Ann Arbor; improve security at the Trotter Multicultural Center; and create a website for emergency funds available to students.

Just imagine substituting the word white for black in those paragraphs and you'd have outraged protests if not full-scale riots breaking out at UofM.

BAMN now is demanding that the University of Michigan not look at SATs or ACTs, because objective scores can get in the way of subjective touchy-feely and makes it more difficult to use race-based admissions under the radar by having an easily discernible standard.

Expect a lot more, and louder, wailing and yelling from the race merchants as they come to realize the time for discrimination based on race is coming to an end.