Page 10 - Patrick Strawbridge News Today

Increased diversity in medical schools and care teams benefits patients, argue AAMC and AMA

 

<strong>21WIRE</strong> | This latest legal challenge may trigger a political firestorm.

If they do what it sounded like they will do, it will end the ability of colleges and universities, public and private, to consider race as one factor in admissions.

The true meaning of the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments got a major boost from a fired up conservative majority.

The liberal Justices tore into the anti-affirmative action attorney today, with Elena Kagan getting the internet especially fired up.

The future of affirmative action and use of race in college admissions took center stage at the conservative-dominated Supreme Court Monday. Separate lawsuits filed against Harvard and the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill argue the consideration of race disadvantages some students and violates the Constitution. Current Supreme Court precedent says race can be a factor in admissions, but schools can’t set a racial quota.

If they do what it sounded like they will do, it will end the ability of colleges and universities, public and private, to consider race as one factor in admissions.

Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan suggested that gender-neutral admission processes could give "white men" an advantage over people who have been "kicked in the teeth."

With a 6-3 conservative-liberal majority, the question may be not whether the court will strike down affirmative action, but how far it will rule.