ICYMI: Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas criticized Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson for speaking out against the recent court decision that put an end to affirmative action in US colleges and universities based on race.
Justice Thomas, in his concurring opinion, states that Justice Jackson’s dissent tries to connect “the lasting impact of slavery and the characteristics of inherited wealth” to explain why Black Americans experience more negative socioeconomic consequences.
“This, she claims, locks blacks into a seemingly perpetual inferior caste. Such a view is irrational; it is an insult to individual achievement and cancerous to young minds seeking to push through barriers, rather than consign themselves to permanent victimhood,” wrote Thomas.
Justice Thomas argued that the promotion of Black accomplishment serves as a response to the prevalent “race-based worldview” espoused by Justice Jackson and liberals in America.
“Individuals are the sum of their unique experiences, challenges, and accomplishments. What matters is not the barriers they face, but how they choose to confront them,” Thomas writes.
Thomas acknowledged the challenges faced by black Americans in the past that have caused social and economic distress, but he remains optimistic that the United States will uphold its principle of true equality, regardless of skin color, following the ruling.
The great failure of this country was slavery and its progeny. And, the tragic failure of this Court was its misinterpretation of the Reconstruction Amendments, as Justice Harlan predicted in Plessy. We should not repeat this mistake merely because we think, as our predecessors thought, that the present arrangements are superior to the Constitution.
The Court’s opinion rightly makes clear that Grutter is, for all intents and purposes, overruled. And, it sees the universities’ admissions policies for what they are: rudderless, race-based preferences designed to ensure a particular racial mix in their entering classes. Those policies fly in the face of our colorblind Constitution and our Nation’s equality ideal. In short, they are plainly—and boldly—unconstitutional. See Brown II, 349 U. S., at 298 (noting that the Brown case one year earlier had “declare[d] the fundamental principle that racial discrimination in public education is unconstitutional”).
While I am painfully aware of the social and economic ravages which have befallen my race and all who suffer discrimination, I hold out enduring hope that this country will live up to its principles so clearly enunciated in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States: that all men are created equal, are equal citizens, and must be treated equally before the law.
The Court issued a ruling on Thursday which banned the use of race in college admissions. Many institutions of higher education in the US had been following this practice since the 1960s, when civil rights movements and the Brown v. Board of Education decision highlighted the need to take racial diversity into account. This ruling marks a significant change in how colleges are allowed to consider race during the admissions process.
The decisions made by Harvard and the University of North Carolina regarding admissions practices were found to be in violation of the 14th Amendment’s equal protection clause by the court’s six conservative justices. However, Judge Jackson dissented and sided with the court’s three liberal justices.
“Many universities have for too long wrongly concluded that the touchstone of an individual’s identity is not challenges bested, skills built, or lessons learned, but the color of their skin,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in the opinion.
“Eliminating racial discrimination means eliminating all of it,” he added.
During his over 30 years on the Supreme Court, Justice Thomas, a Black man and the second African-American to serve on the court, has strongly opposed college admissions that are based on race. He was nominated by former President George H.W. Bush and is currently the court’s longest-serving member following the passing of Justice Antonin Scalia in 2016.
Leave a Comment