Scalia: Good Schools May Be Too Hard For Blacks

[finehoe]

Justice Antonin Scalia at one point during the arguments said, "There are those who contend that it does not benefit African­ Americans to ­­ to get them into the University of Texas where they do not do well, as opposed to having them go to a less-­advanced school, a slower-­track school where they do well," as opposed to Texas' flagship campus in Austin. There, he said, some are "being pushed ahead in classes that are too fast for them." Scalia went on to add that one brief submitted in the case had said that "most of the black scientists in this country don't come from schools like the University of Texas....They come from lesser schools where they do not feel that they're that they're being pushed ahead­­ in classes that are too ­­ too fast for them."

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/supreme-court-hears-arguments-on-affirmative-action-for-college-admission/

[Adam White]

Shocking.

That was sarcasm.

[finehoe]

Apparently the GOP has dropped the euphemisms and has gone straight to the racism and xenophobia.

[Dog Walker]

Past time for Scalia to retire.  He is obviously in his dotage and his professional filter has failed.

[Ajax]

Apparently the GOP has dropped the euphemisms and has gone straight to the racism and xenophobia.

Because Scalia referred to an amicus brief during oral arguments? 

[Ajax]

Past time for Scalia to retire.  He is obviously in his dotage and his professional filter has failed.

Professional filter?  You don't want justices to consider all of the evidence before them? 

[finehoe]

Study: Scalia Better Off in "Less Advanced" Court

By Andy Borowitz

WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report)—A new study conducted by legal scholars indicates that Justice Antonin Scalia would fare better if he served as a judge at a court that was "less advanced" than the United States Supreme Court.

According to the study, Scalia's struggles to perform his duties in a competent fashion stem from his being inappropriately placed on a court that is "too demanding" for a person of his limited abilities.

"Forcing Justice Scalia to weigh in on complex legal issues that he lacks the background or aptitude to comprehend is, at the end of the day, cruel," the study said.

The legal scholars theorized that Scalia would be more likely to thrive in a "lesser court where he does not feel that he is being pushed to hear cases that are too challenging for him."

"If Scalia were reassigned to a 'slow track' institution such as a town traffic court, that would be better for everyone," the study recommended.

http://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowitz-report/study-scalia-better-off-in-less-advanced-court

[Snufflee]

Study: Scalia Better Off in "Less Advanced" Court

By Andy Borowitz

WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report)—A new study conducted by legal scholars indicates that Justice Antonin Scalia would fare better if he served as a judge at a court that was "less advanced" than the United States Supreme Court.

According to the study, Scalia's struggles to perform his duties in a competent fashion stem from his being inappropriately placed on a court that is "too demanding" for a person of his limited abilities.

"Forcing Justice Scalia to weigh in on complex legal issues that he lacks the background or aptitude to comprehend is, at the end of the day, cruel," the study said.

The legal scholars theorized that Scalia would be more likely to thrive in a "lesser court where he does not feel that he is being pushed to hear cases that are too challenging for him."

"If Scalia were reassigned to a 'slow track' institution such as a town traffic court, that would be better for everyone," the study recommended.

http://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowitz-report/study-scalia-better-off-in-less-advanced-court

So your defense when people question your intent on labeling Scalia as a GOP racist is to post a humor article based on a strawman argument. Confirmation Bias confirmed.  Scalia's argument needs to be taken in context of his consideration of the Amicus brief in support of the plaintiff which a good judge would consider not outright dismiss.

[finehoe]

So your defense when people question your intent on labeling Scalia as a GOP racist is to post a humor article based on a strawman argument. Confirmation Bias confirmed.  Scalia's argument needs to be taken in context of his consideration of the Amicus brief in support of the plaintiff which a good judge would consider not outright dismiss.

Why is that?  As an originalist, Scalia should only be considering the legal issue in the case, which is whether affirmative action programs such as that being employed by the University of Texas are unconstitutional, not whether they are a good idea.

[Snufflee]

He is asking a probing question based on the merits and the mismatch theory, like it or not it has to be probed and does hold merit in this case. Whether or not you or I subscribe to this theory is not important to the over arching discussion of Scalia's line of reasoning or questioning. He is considering an Amicus brief based on the mis-match theory and posed a question based on this brief. he would do the court and eventual legal precedence a disservice by holding his tongue because he may earn the scorn of the NYT or other left leaning media organizations.  As to other arguments based on the courts make up the reverse is true for the more liberal justices who would dismiss the mis-match theory and the Amicus brief because it doesn't fit the current narrative of race relations in the US as of 2015. So in essence the entire court is corrupted and to single out a specific justice because they don't agree with "YOU" is just as bad as an arch conservative singling out a more liberal justice.

[finehoe]

Whether he agrees or disagrees with me is irrelevant.  The point is the hypocrisy of Scalia who loves to lecture liberals about the distinction between good laws and constitutionally permissible laws, aka "judicial activism".  He says to confuse these two categories is the essence of the judiciary's illegitimate usurpation of the legislative role. Yet Scalia has no problem reconciling his supposed opposition to judicial activism and his supposed fidelity to originalist interpretation when it comes to a law conservatives don't like.

[BridgeTroll]

Who knew asking questions was activism... 

[finehoe]

Who knew asking questions was activism... 

So what is the question he's asking here?

"There are those who contend that it does not benefit African­ Americans to ­­ to get them into the University of Texas where they do not do well, as opposed to having them go to a less-­advanced school, a slower-­track school where they do well," as opposed to Texas' flagship campus in Austin. There, he said, some are "being pushed ahead in classes that are too fast for them." Scalia went on to add that one brief submitted in the case had said that "most of the black scientists in this country don't come from schools like the University of Texas....They come from lesser schools where they do not feel that they're that they're being pushed ahead­­ in classes that are too fast for them."

[TheCat]

Apparently the GOP has dropped the euphemisms and has gone straight to the racism and xenophobia.

+1

[BridgeTroll]

Who knew asking questions was activism... 

So what is the question he's asking here?

"There are those who contend that it does not benefit African­ Americans to ­­ to get them into the University of Texas where they do not do well, as opposed to having them go to a less-­advanced school, a slower-­track school where they do well," as opposed to Texas' flagship campus in Austin. There, he said, some are "being pushed ahead in classes that are too fast for them." Scalia went on to add that one brief submitted in the case had said that "most of the black scientists in this country don't come from schools like the University of Texas....They come from lesser schools where they do not feel that they're that they're being pushed ahead­­ in classes that are too fast for them."

What was the answer?  I hear the angst regarding the question... was there an answer?  Here is the brief... enjoy!

http://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/Sander-brief-for-Fisher-v-Univesrity-of-Texas-corrected.pdf