Wednesday’s 4-3 Supreme Court decision in Fisher v UT Austin allows the continuation of race-based practices in the admissions process. This is yet another example of creating racist policies in a supposed attempt to end racist policies.
One thing needs to be made absolutely clear: There is simply no such thing as “reverse racism.” That term is typically used to describe an event where a minority acts in a way that discriminates against a white person. When racism is properly understood as discrimination or prejudice based on race, there is no place for the idea of “reverse racism.” In fact, it implies that the person or group practicing “reverse racism” is somehow justified in turning the tables. If racism is wrong — and it is — then it is always wrong.
Affirmative Action is a prime example of how the liberal establishment seems to miss that basic principle. The logic — if this writer can use that word to describe the disjointed and inconsistent thought process used by liberals to arrive at their conclusions — goes something like this: “Racism is wrong. It holds minorities down. The best solution is to hold white people back and allow minorities to get ahead, because we all know they could never do it on their own.”
A case in point is Fisher v UT Austin. The University of Texas at Austin is a prestigious school that has a very high bar for admissions. To be considered for admission, a Texas student must graduate in the top 10 percent of his or her class or meet other guidelines. So far, so good. Except that those other guidelines include not only an evaluation of the prospective students’ talents, leadership qualities, and family circumstances, but also their race.
In 2008 Abigail Fisher applied to UT Austin. She had graduated in the top 12 percent of her class at Stephen F. Austin High School in Austin, Texas. She had a high school GPA of 3.59. She also scored 1180 of a possible 1600 on her SAT (well within the range of incoming freshmen at UT Austin). She was active in community organizations, such as Habitat for Humanity, and was involved in both the orchestra and math competitions in high school. She is also white. She was denied admission.
Fisher and fellow plaintiff Rachel Multer Michalewicz — who’s story is similar to Fisher’s — filed suit, claiming they were denied admission based on race. The case has gone back and forth in the courts for the past eight years, with one court after another deciding one way or another. The U.S. Supreme Court first heard the case in 2012 and in 2013 decided to kick the case back to the lower court, where the whole thing started over again.
On Wednesday, the U.S. Supreme Court, after hearing the case again, upheld the practice of Affirmative Action in the university’s admissions process. In other words, it is the court’s opinion that it is perfectly alright to reject a student based on race — as long as that student is white.
And there is the rub. If — as liberals correctly say — color doesn’t matter, then color doesn’t matter. But then, this writer is expecting consistency where it is never found.
In a statement issued by Judicial Watch, Tom Fitton, president of the conservative watchdog group, said:
Today’s decision allowing racial discrimination in college admissions is at odds with the U.S. Constitution and promotes crackpot racial theories. Today’s decision is racially inflammatory and undermines the rule of law. The government has no business doling out special benefits based on race.
When race-based policies are allowed and even encouraged in the name of equality, there are two sets of victims. The Abigail Fishers of the world are made victims because they are not allowed to do certain things so that others can have “a better chance.” Those others are made victims because they are treated as if they could never rise to the occasion unless someone else was held back. It is a viscous and diabolical lie. It assumes that there is only so much success to go around, when in reality, success is made, not given.
Did being rejected by UT Austin for the color of her skin ruin Abigail Fisher’s life? Not even close. While pursuing the lawsuit, she also pursued a successful academic career at Louisiana State University, where she majored in finance. She has graduated and is working as a financial analyst in Austin.
Fisher had dreamed of attending UT Austin since second grade. Her father and sister are both alumni of the prestigious school, and several of her friends have gone there. In a video interview released by her lawyers, she said the issue here is one of discrimination. “I was taught from the time I was a little girl that any kind of discrimination was wrong. And for an institution of higher learning to act this way makes no sense to me,” she said, adding, “If people say anything about me, I hope they say I didn’t take this sitting down. I didn’t accept the process because the process is wrong.”
And now, that wrong process has the SCOTUS stamp of approval.
