Just a few days ago, I warned you all about liberal judges.
Yesterday there was an en banc decision of the Sixth Circuit, Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action v. University of Michigan, in which the court ruled that a law, passed by initiative, to ban affirmative action in Michigan public universities, was unconstitutional.
This is an example of how liberal judges will ignore legal precedent in order to advance the liberal agenda, even against the wishes of the majority of voters.
In Bakke, the Supreme Court held that although strict scrutiny is applied to any sort of racial discrimination, even against whites, universities were allowed to consider racial diversity because it was a compelling government interest. But it was pretty clear from the decision that diversity wasn’t something that universities were forced to consider, it was optional, something they might consider. (However, it’s interesting that practically zero universities have elected not to consider it—this is an example of how Universities are controlled by the far left, because even among moderately liberal regular people, affirmative action in university admissions is not supported, as evidenced by the overwhelming 58% to 42% support for the Michigan voter initiative in question.)
In this Michigan case, we see federal judges making up a new rule, ignoring the precedent, in order to protect a policy supported by the far left. I warned you in my previous post that a liberal Supreme Court would result in “racial quotas for all desirable jobs, based on loose interpretation of existing civil rights statutes,“ and I guess that also includes mandatory racial quotes for university admissions as well based on even looser interpretation of the Constitution. We see the courts moving in this direction in this case. It will probably be overturned by the Supreme Court by a 5-4 decision, but one more liberal Supreme Court Justice means that mandatory affirmative action eventually leading to mandatory racial quotas becomes the law of the United States.