Supreme Court Decision Ends Racism of Affirmative Action

Outlawing colleges’ overtly racist admissions policies was long overdue, and I’m glad the Supreme Court ruled the way it did yesterday.

But is it going to have any impact in real life?

Ask yourself why colleges like Harvard have already gone “test-optional,” meaning SAT’s and ACT’s and the rest of the standardized tests that can’t be gamed by academic Marxists are out the window.

Harvard and UNC and all the rest of them are now going to rely a lot more on say, essays, in which otherwise unqualified high school students can make it very clear whether they’re members of protected classes, or not.

In the 6-3 majority opinion, Chief Justice John Roberts warned against that obvious grift, saying that “universities may not simply establish through application essays or other means the regime we hold unlawful today.”

Oh yeah? Just watch them do it, Mr. Chief Justice. They may get sued, but that’s where that $50 billion Harvard endowment will come in handy.

The pampered pukes pushing this newest form of de jure racism are Democrats. They don’t believe in equal rights or blind justice, any more than they did when their predecessors in the party were firing on Fort Sumter or starting the Ku Klux Klan.

The Democrats believe they can do anything they want, anytime, and get away with it. Are they wrong? Look at Hunter Biden.

The proponents of this state-sanctioned racism really don’t like it when you quote Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.:

“I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.”

What part of that sentence do the modern-day racialists not understand?

There’s a book called “How to be an Anti-Racist,” by a guy named who changed his name from Ibram Henry Rogers to Ibram Xolani Kendi – a good career move, obviously.

Mr. Rogers, er Kendi, let the cat out of the bag when he wrote the following:

“The only remedy to racist discrimination is antiracist discrimination. The only remedy to past discrimination is present discrimination. The only remedy to present discrimination is future discrimination.”

Pretty clear, right? Too clear, apparently, because the new edition includes a rewritten version of that paragraph:

“The only remedy to negative racist discrimination that produces inequity is positive antiracist discrimination that produces equity….”

So discrimination against whites and Asians is “positive.” And singling out some groups for discrimination based solely on their skin color is okay because it’s a form of “antiracist” racism? Have I got that straight?

As Chief Justice Roberts wrote in yesterday’s decision:

“Eliminating racial discrimination means eliminating all of it.”

Justice Clarence Thomas wrote a concurring opinion pointing out how absurd it is to enthusiastically promote racism to end racism.

“It is not even theoretically possible to ‘help’ a certain racial group without causing harm to members of other racial groups. It should be obvious that every racial classification helps, in a narrow sense, some races and hurts others.”

The proponents of modern anti-white, anti-Asian racism always love to talk about “disparate impact.” I would argue that’s a good description of what happens with certain white applicants at these elite schools.

If you’re the trust-funded offspring of some filthy rich white family, Harvard isn’t going to hold your race against you. Am I right, Jared Kushner and a thousand other “legacy” Harvard grads?

No, the only disparate impact over the last 50 years or so has been on whites and Asians from lower-middle-class, blue-collar families.

As Justice Thomas noted, this outrageous, unconstitutional racism by Harvard and UNC that the Supreme Court struck down yesterday is nothing new for either school.

“History has repeatedly shown that purportedly benign discrimination may be pernicious, and discriminators may go to great lengths to hide and perpetuate their unlawful conduct.”

Take Harvard, please.

“Harvard’s ‘holistic’ admissions policy,” Thomas wrote, “began in the 1920s when it was developed to exclude Jews.”

As for my alma mater, Thomas noted, “UNC also has a checkered history, dating back to its time as a segregated university…. To the extent past is prologue, the university respondents’ histories hardly recommend them as trustworthy arbiters of whether racial discrimination is necessary to achieve educational goals.”

Ditto, Dementia Joe Biden, who denounced yesterday’s decision from the White House. This is the guy who in the Seventies said he didn’t want his children going to school in a “racial jungle.” Now he’s the Great Emancipator. When it comes to endorsing racist policies, Biden is as dirty as the two “elite” schools.

“Harvard and UNC now forthrightly state,” Thomas noted, “that they racially discriminate when it comes to admitting students.”

So Harvard and UNC, who acknowledge that their past racism was evil, now argue that their present racism is virtuous. Have I got that right?

In his concurring opinion, Thomas even mentioned the history of racism against Asian-Americans, dating back to the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 and the internment of Japanese-Americans during World War II by a Democrat president.

“Asian Americans can hardly be described as the beneficiaries of historical racial advantages.”

So these colleges that in the past embraced “gentlemen’s agreements” against Jews and Democrat Jim Crow racism against blacks now espouse a new Politically Correct form of racism – “affirmative action,” against Asians and blue-collar whites.

All the pampered pukes in the Democrat party and state-run media (but I repeat myself) will argue that without racism we can never overcome racism.

In fact, you can sum up the whole argument for the racial-preferences scam in one single individual case, and here it is:

If we don’t have racial quotas and set-asides, then how will there ever be any opportunities for advancement for oppressed minorities like…. Elizabeth Warren.

Er, never mind.