Comments on: Yet Another Reason to Avoid Trotskyites http://goodspeedupdate.com/2006/1976 Rob Goodspeed's blog Mon, 09 Jan 2012 16:37:16 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: WSHancock http://goodspeedupdate.com/2006/1976/comment-page-1#comment-6884 WSHancock Sat, 24 Jun 2006 12:09:32 +0000 http://goodspeedupdate.com/?p=1976#comment-6884 Perhaps one should look at Ms. Gratz' efforts to end affirmative action in Michigan as accepting an invitation issued by the U.S. Supreme Court in the Grutter case. This is probably the most consciously ignored passage in that case: "Universities in California, Florida, and Washington State, where racial preferences in admissions are prohibited by state law, are currently engaged in experimenting with a wide variety of alternative approaches. Universities in other States can and should draw on the most promising aspects of these race-neutral alternatives as they develop." Seems Ms. Gratz and company want Michigan to join the ranks of the experimenters. Perhaps one should look at Ms. Gratz’ efforts to end affirmative action in Michigan as accepting an invitation issued by the U.S. Supreme Court in the Grutter case. This is probably the most consciously ignored passage in that case:

“Universities in California, Florida, and Washington State, where racial preferences in admissions are prohibited by state law, are currently engaged in experimenting with a wide variety of alternative approaches. Universities in other States can and should draw on the most promising aspects of these race-neutral alternatives as they develop.”

Seems Ms. Gratz and company want Michigan to join the ranks of the experimenters.

]]> By: Rob http://goodspeedupdate.com/2006/1976/comment-page-1#comment-6853 Rob Thu, 22 Jun 2006 16:29:24 +0000 http://goodspeedupdate.com/?p=1976#comment-6853 While you're correct the court ruled in Ms. Gratz favor and struck down the <em>specific</em> policy for undergraduates at the University of Michigan, in the companion case <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grutter_v._Bollinger" rel="nofollow">Grutter V. Bollinger</a>, 539 U.S. 306 (2003) the court upheld the constitutionality of affirmative action. This was my point: having failed to end affirmative action through the courts, Gratz, Connerly, and their supporters have turned to the ballot initiative. While you’re correct the court ruled in Ms. Gratz favor and struck down the specific policy for undergraduates at the University of Michigan, in the companion case Grutter V. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 306 (2003) the court upheld the constitutionality of affirmative action.

This was my point: having failed to end affirmative action through the courts, Gratz, Connerly, and their supporters have turned to the ballot initiative.

]]> By: W.S.Hancock http://goodspeedupdate.com/2006/1976/comment-page-1#comment-6851 W.S.Hancock Thu, 22 Jun 2006 15:06:04 +0000 http://goodspeedupdate.com/?p=1976#comment-6851 I write to correct an error in your post. In your post of June 15, you wrote, "Having failed in the courts, Gratz is currently heading an effort to ban affirmative action through a ballot initiative." Ms. Gratz did not fail in the courts. She won her case. The United State Supreme Court held that the University of Michigan undergraduate admissions program discriminated against Ms. Gratz and thousands like her. Gratz v. Bollinger. 539 US 244 (2003). The Court ruled in Ms. Gratz' favor 6-3. Not even close, really. I write to correct an error in your post. In your post of June 15, you wrote, “Having failed in the courts, Gratz is currently heading an effort to ban affirmative action through a ballot initiative.”

Ms. Gratz did not fail in the courts. She won her case. The United State Supreme Court held that the University of Michigan undergraduate admissions program discriminated against Ms. Gratz and thousands like her. Gratz v. Bollinger. 539 US 244 (2003). The Court ruled in Ms. Gratz’ favor 6-3. Not even close, really.

]]> By: Rob http://goodspeedupdate.com/2006/1976/comment-page-1#comment-6763 Rob Thu, 15 Jun 2006 20:36:06 +0000 http://goodspeedupdate.com/?p=1976#comment-6763 No, he just gets in your face. No, he just gets in your face.

]]> By: David Boyle http://goodspeedupdate.com/2006/1976/comment-page-1#comment-6762 David Boyle Thu, 15 Jun 2006 19:47:41 +0000 http://goodspeedupdate.com/?p=1976#comment-6762 "intimidation tactics", I think you mean. ...He pulled a knife on you or something? Just curious. “intimidation tactics”, I think you mean. …He pulled a knife on you or something? Just curious.

]]>