The end of the workweek brought momentous rulings from the Supreme Court, which have been met with a chorus of doom-and-gloom reactions from the media, mostly dominated by liberals. As expected, they express concern that the Court’s decisions on affirmative action, religious freedom, and student debt forgiveness will “re-shape America for generations to come.” Some reporters note that the rulings were made “strictly along ideological lines,” prompting calls from Democrats like Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer for “re-shaping the Court.”
The emotional distress among liberals arises from the fact that the Supreme Court is now following the Constitution rather than arbitrarily making laws, as seen in the controversial Roe v. Wade decision in 1973. Notably, President Joe Biden, humiliated by the rulings, especially on student loan bailouts, arrogantly suggested that the Court interpreted the Constitution incorrectly. This audacity is surprising, given Biden’s lackluster performance in law school.
The affirmative action case addressing admissions policies at Harvard and the University of North Carolina, where the Court found a violation of the Equal Protections Clause of the 14th Amendment, was a blow to those who support discrimination against Asian and white students in favor of black and Hispanic applicants. The idea of picking winners and losers based on skin color in college admissions goes against the dream of Martin Luther King, Jr., who advocated for judging individuals based on their character, not skin color. The Court’s decision upholds meritocracy in college admissions, granting students admission based on their abilities, not race.
Some educational institutions, like Boston University, expressed disappointment with the rulings, claiming they may lead to less diverse college campuses and an unjust America. However, the argument for affirmative action often perpetuates the soft bigotry of low expectations, assuming that black and brown students need special consideration due to their skin color. This undermines the fact that many minority students come from middle-class or upper-class backgrounds with equal opportunities.
The Supreme Court’s guidance on race considerations in college admissions was not entirely clear, leaving some uncertainty among educational institutions. Chief Justice John G. Roberts emphasized that race should not be the sole determining factor in admissions decisions, but individual experiences related to race can still be considered.
As the Court adheres to the Constitution, Boston University law students are being offered mental health resources to cope with these changes. The liberal-leaning student government criticized recent rulings that protected religious freedom and deemed Biden’s student loan forgiveness plan unconstitutional, claiming they erode the rights of marginalized communities and undermine diversity.
In reality, affirmative action has also significantly benefited women, who now often outnumber men on college campuses. The Supreme Court’s shift towards originalist justices, including Clarence Thomas, is a welcome correction, ensuring the Constitution is upheld as intended and not as the left wished it to be. Coping with these changes will be a challenge for liberals, but adherence to the Constitution is essential for the future of America.
