New Hope for the Culture of America

[NewXD40fun]

President Bush's two Supreme Court Justice appointees are coming through. This anticipated decision will be the beginning of the end of the decay in our society caused by the cancer of Liberalism.

I'm sure the Reverend Martin Luther King Jr. is celebrating this new direction of the Supreme Court.



Justices question school policies

The Supreme Court debate suggests most favor halting the use of race to assign students to public facilities.

By David G. Savage, Times Staff Writer
December 5, 2006

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court justices, hearing arguments on school integration, signaled Monday that they are likely to bar the use of race when assigning students to public schools.

Such a ruling could deal a blow to hundreds of school systems across the nation that use racial guidelines to maintain a semblance of classroom integration in cities where neighborhoods are divided along racial lines.

However, it would be a major victory for those who have called for "colorblind" decision-making by public officials.

Monday's argument also may well mark the emergence of a five-member majority determined to outlaw the official use of race in schools, colleges and public agencies.

"The purpose of the Equal Protection clause is to ensure that people are treated as individuals rather than based on the color of their skin," Chief Justice John G. Roberts. Jr. said.

Three years ago, the court upheld affirmative action at colleges and universities. But that 5-4 decision depended on now-retired Justice Sandra Day O'Connor. Since then, President Bush's two appointees — Roberts and Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. — have joined the court, and the tenor of Monday's debate suggested a new majority would frown on race-based affirmative action if the issue were to return.

At issue Monday were the racial-integration guidelines adopted by school boards in Seattle and Louisville, Ky.

Seattle had allowed its students to choose which high school they wanted to attend, but tried to maintain a racial balance within 10 percentage points of the district's overall enrollment. Before the program was suspended in 2001, 210 white students and 90 minorities were denied their first choice of a high school.

The Louisville schools seek to keep black enrollment between 15% and 50%.

Both policies were challenged by parents of a small number of students, most of them white, who were denied their first-choice school because of their race. Bush administration lawyers joined the cases on the side of the parents.

Officials could not say how many districts use racial guidelines that might be affected by the court's ruling. But a ruling against such policies could jeopardize many magnet-school programs nationwide that use race as an admissions factor, including the one in Los Angeles Unified School District.

Outlook for LAUSD

About 54,000 LAUSD students are enrolled in magnet schools, and the district says "openings are determined by the need to maintain a racially balanced enrollment." The district's lawyers concede that a high court ruling striking down integration guidelines in Seattle and Louisville would put the Los Angeles program "at risk."

The justices who spoke during Monday's argument all agreed racial integration is a laudable goal. But a narrow majority of them — in comments, questions and past decisions — made clear their belief that the Constitution forbids shifting children from one school to another based on race.

Until Monday, civil rights lawyers held out the faint hope that Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, a centrist, might vote to uphold local school integration plans, even though he had regularly opposed race-based affirmative action in the past.

But Kennedy quickly dashed those hopes.

He told a lawyer for the Seattle school board that "outright racial balancing … is patently unconstitutional. And that seems to be what you have here." Agreeing with Kennedy, Roberts noted that the districts were making decisions on assigning students to schools "based on skin color and not any other factor."

No students are excluded from school because of their race, responded Michael F. Madden, the school board's lawyer. They may be assigned to a "different [but] basically a comparable school."

"How is that different from the 'separate-but-equal' argument? … Everyone got a seat in Brown as well," replied Roberts. "But because they were assigned to those seats on the basis of race, it violated equal protection."

Roberts was referring to the landmark 1954 decision in Brown vs. Board of Education that rejected the "separate but equal" doctrine and struck down racial segregation.

'Segregation is harmful'

Madden disputed the comparison between forced segregation and voluntary integration. "Segregation is harmful" to students, while diversity and integration "have benefits" for black and white children, he said.

But the conservative justices did not seem swayed by the argument that the ends justified the means.

Achieving racial diversity "is certainly an admirable goal," said Justice Antonin Scalia. But he added, "Even if the objective is OK, you cannot achieve it by any means whatsoever…. I thought one of the absolute restrictions [in the Constitution] is that you cannot judge and classify people on the basis of their race."

Alito also skeptically questioned the school lawyers, and Justice Clarence Thomas, though he said nothing Monday, has always insisted public officials may not treat individuals differently because of their race.

If there was one hopeful sign Monday for the proponents of the schools' programs, it came when Kennedy said school officials were free to pursue racial integration as a goal. For example, a school system could locate a new school between a white and black neighborhood so as to achieve diversity, he said. School officials also could use special programs or magnet schools to draw a mix of black and white students, he said.

By contrast, "you're characterizing each student by reason of the color of his or her skin," Kennedy told one of the school board lawyers. "That is quite a different means. And it seems to be that should only be, if ever allowed, as a last resort."

The court's four liberal justices, sounding frustrated by their colleagues, defended the school integration policies. They wondered how the Supreme Court could reverse course from demanding desegregation in decades past to now, possibly, blocking it.

Justice Stephen G. Breyer noted that, in 1957, federal troops were sent to Little Rock, Ark., to desegregate the schools over the objections of local officials.

"The society was divided. Here we have a society, black and white, who elect school board members who together have voted to have this form of integration," Breyer said. "Given that change in society, which is a good one, how can the Constitution be interpreted in a way that would require us, the judges, to go in and make them take the children out of the school?"

U.S. Solicitor General Paul D. Clement was unmoved. "I think the answer is that the lesson of history in this area is that racial classifications are not one where we should just let local school board officials do what they think is right," he said.

The court will issue a ruling in several months on Parents Involved in Community Schools vs. Seattle School District No. 1 and Meredith vs. Jefferson County Board of Education.


http://www.latimes.com/news/printedi...ck=1&cset=true



History will reveal that the Supreme Court Justices appointed by President George W. Bush will be one of many of his great accomplishments.




Tom

[LimaXray]

Word... now they need to overturn the decision about using race at the college level so I can stop getting screwed with finacial aid simply because I'm white.

[Mark S.]

Yeah. Let's return to that old 'separate but "equal"' doctrine.

[NewXD40fun]

Originally Posted by Mark S.

Yeah. Let's return to that old 'separate but "equal"' doctrine.

What part of the Constitution are you referring?


Tom

[Brickboy240]

Excuse me, but the job of our public schools is to teach our kids the basics - how to read, write, mathematics and history. They should NOT be conceared about the racial make-up of the kids in the schools. Its just not that important. Learning is.

Drive through any city in the USA. You'll see neighborhoods that are predominantly one race or another. These people were not forced to live in these places - they CHOSE to live there! Sure, there are exceptions and some mixed neighborhoods, but people usually like to live around others that are like them. Does this make them racist? Of course not!

Forcing people of different cultures and classes together in some sort of social expereiment is not natural or healthy and creates tensions and all sorts of problems in a place that should be harmonious and nurturing, not stressful. Public schools should be about teaching the kids the basics, not a site for social experiments.

I think its safe to say that forcing kids into an integrated school does not create more tolerance any more than kids attending a school that is predominantly their own race breeds hated of other races. This multiculturism garbage needs to end - our kids are not learning or performing as well as kids in other countries, because our educators are more worried about racial integration than reading and writing. The kids lose in the end, when they graduate and don't know as much as foreign kids entering the workforce.

Does this mean that kids in an all black school recieve less of an education or are put at a disadvantage? It shouldn't, if the same curriculum, rules and standards are used in all public schools. Then, everyone receives the same education...do they not?

This is not "separate but equal" but merely saying that forced bussing and forced integration is a silly concearn, compared to teaching the children the basics and giving ALL kids the tools to make it in the workplace and be productive adults. Other nation's school systems are not concearned with nonsense like this and their kids are killing our kids in testing. Its shocking how little our kids know, compared to the kids in many other countries. Why? They teach their kids the basics and reinforce it and don't get bogged down in distractions like racial makeup of the classroom.

These foreign kids will kill ours in the workforce in the future - absolutely run them over...is this what you really want? Never mind that our kids can't add or string a sentance together..whats important is they like and got to sit next to the brown kids. Ugh!

Sad, but some of you will call me racist for pointing this out, but it is more important to me that my kid have a strong foundation of basics like math and reading, than the color of the kids on either side of her in the classroom. When she graduates, a firm grasp on reading, writing and science will help her more in the rest of her life than the race of the kids in all her classes.

This issue...like gay marriage and stem cell research are largely unimportant, nonsense, distraction issues used to divide us up and distract us from the incompetence of our elected leaders...don't fall for it.

(flame away)

- Brickboy240

[NewXD40fun]

Imagine growing up with your parents, friends, relatives, Hollywood Liberals, Democrats, music stars, sports heroes, etc. telling you that to get a good education you would have to go to schools in neighborhoods comprised of people of races other than your own. How would that affect your outlook on life? You would feel like a VICTIM....in my opinion.





Tom

[Brickboy240]

A little more mathematics, science and reading and a little less social engineering...thats all I am asking. I want to see results for the tax monies collected...thats all.

To hell with making the kids feel good about themselves FIRST. When they graduate and are able to perform well in the workplace and have to skills to become productive members of society and not sociopaths, criminals, welfare recipients or standing on the corner with their hand out...believe me...they'll feel PLENTY good about themselves.

- Brickboy240

[bd]

If you don't like the racial make-up of the school your kid attends send them to a private school - don't depend on the government to take care of you.

bd

[DoctorDawg]

Originally Posted by NewXD40fun

Imagine growing up with your parents, friends, relatives, Hollywood Liberals, Democrats, music stars, sports heroes, etc. telling you that to get a good education you would have to go to schools in neighborhoods comprised of people of races other than your own.

Well, gosh...to get a good education you certainly should be regularly exposed to cultures and races other than your own. See: cos·mo·pol·i·tan [koz-muh-pol-i-tn]. Also see: hill·bil·ly [hil-bil-ee].

[hacker15]

Originally Posted by DoctorDawg

Well, gosh...to get a good education you certainly should be regularly exposed to cultures and races other than your own. See: cos·mo·pol·i·tan [koz-muh-pol-i-tn]. Also see: hill·bil·ly [hil-bil-ee].

Oh, Doc - I was going to take a pass on this one, but I just couldn't resist....

Do you really believe being "cosmopolitan" is somehow better? Better than what? Rural? You imply "hillbilly", as though that's the opposite of "cosmopolitan".

Exposure to other races and cultures is a very recent innovation in our socity. Does that mean that all past generations were "hillbilly"? All those graduates of Harvard, Yale, Stamford, UCLA? Hmmm......

IMHO, being "cosmopolitan" somehow defuses the validity of your own national heritage and culture. If all cultures are equal (which I don't believe is true), you wind up with the concepts like rap is equal to classical music.