“Justice Sotomayor seemed to mock one of Chief Justice Roberts’s most memorable lines. In a 2007 decision that limited the use of race to achieve integration in public school systems, he wrote, ‘The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.’”
On the contrary, the Wise Latina believes that the only way to end discrimination on the basis of race is…to discriminate on the basis of race.
Let’s examine the basis for her contention, beginning with Big Guy’s basis for social justice: empathy:
But it’s those five percent of the cases that really count. And in those five percent of the cases, what you’ve got to look at is—what is in the justice’s heart. What’s their broader vision of what America should be.
And we need somebody who’s got the heart—the empathy—to recognize what it’s like to be a young teenage mom. The empathy to understand what it’s like to be poor or African-American or gay or disabled or old—and that’s the criteria by which I’ll be selecting my judges – Barack Obama
In what can only be described as a blow to Big Guy’s “empathy standard” (or empathy “canard” depending on your point of view) the Supremes voted to uphold Michigan’s constitutional amendment that bans affirmative action in admissions to the state’s public universities. Where’s the “empathy” in striking down preferential treatment in higher education based on race?
I’ll tell you where – in the dissenting opinion expressed by the Wise Latina (“I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life.”) that’s where.
Speaking on behalf of herself and the Wise Jewess, Justice Ginsberg (and - if she hadn’t had to recuse herself for having argued the government’s case for Affirmative Action in her pre-Wise Lesbian days, Justice Kagan) the Wise Latina injected a wealth of empathy into her argument:
Justice Sonia Sotomayor, joined by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, filed a 58-page dissent and summarized it from the bench, signaling strong disagreement with the majority.
Justice Sotomayor wrote that Michigan voters "changed the basic rules of the political process in that state in a manner that uniquely disadvantaged racial minorities." WSJ
But Justice Sonia Sotomayor, in the longest, most passionate and most significant dissent of her career, said the Constitution required special vigilance in light of the history of slavery, Jim Crow and “recent examples of discriminatory changes to state voting laws.”
Her opinion, longer than the four other opinions combined, appeared to reflect her own experiences with affirmative action at Princeton and Yale Law School. “I had been admitted to the Ivy League through a special door,” she wrote in her best-selling memoir, “My Beloved World.” For years, she wrote, “I lived the day-to-day reality of affirmative action.” NYT
Two take-aways from those comments:
- Perhaps the Wise Latina should have recused herself, along with the Wise Lesbian
- Quelle Surprise! Affirmative Action admission to the Ivy Leagues is one of those “secret trap doors” that Lady M has been looking for all her life! She walked right through and didn’t even know it!!
The most interesting aspect of this story though is that we’ve officially reached the point where not only do words no longer mean what they originally meant, they now mean the exact opposite.
This analysis from NRO will help you understand:
Her opinion is legally illiterate and logically indefensible, and the still-young career of this self-described “wise Latina” on the Supreme Court already offers a case study in the moral and legal corrosion that inevitably results from elevating ethnic-identity politics over the law.
In a perfectly Orwellian dissenting opinion, which she read dramatically from the bench, Justice Sotomayor argued that the decision of the people of Michigan to end racial discrimination is itself an instance of racial discrimination and that the only way to mitigate such racial discrimination is through the mandatory maintenance of racial discrimination. In this opinion she was joined by Justice Ginsburg, with Justice Kagan recusing herself from the case. Justice Sotomayor argued that Michigan’s Proposal 2, which mandates race-neutral state policies, is the sort of legislation used to “oppress minority groups.” By outlawing racial discrimination, she argued, “a majority of the Michigan electorate changed the basic rules of the political process in that State in a manner that uniquely disadvantaged racial minorities.”
So, you see, “racial neutrality” is now “racist.” At least that explains why Republicans are all racists, butt I think it confuses things on other fronts. As they say, be sure to read the whole thing; it’s educational reading on how the Left contorts and “transforms” the meaning of words to their image and likeness. Hence things such as “preferential treatment based on race” are transformed from being “not forbidden” to “compulsory.”
I have much more to say on this subject, butt as I’ve lost electric power and my battery is very low I’m going to have to leave that up to all of you and try to locate my phone to post this before I’m DOA. Carry on!
Cross-Posted and Featured on Patriot Action Network