DIRS.INFO The most relevant business & tech news

☆ Opinion | Sandra Day O’Connor Never Stopped Being a Politician
▼ + stars: | 2023-12-01 | by ( Jeffrey Toobin | ) www.nytimes.com time to read: +3 min

Because she was a skilled politician, her radar was set for the political center, and that’s where she always wanted the court to be. Justice O’Connor avoided such a dramatic choice. And where Justice O’Connor was on the issue is almost exactly where public opinion was, too. Justice O’Connor didn’t call herself a feminist, though she was one, and the patronizing nature of that provision appalled her. As it happens, throughout the court’s history, backgrounds like Justice O’Connor’s were more the rule than the exception.

Persons: O’Connor’s, Norman Schwarzkopf, “, O’Connor, —, Casey, Roe, Wade, Justice O’Connor, Anthony Kennedy, David Souter, Justice O’Connor didn’t, Samuel Alito, Brown, Earl Warren Organizations: General Motors, of Education Locations: Pennsylvania, California

☆ Former Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor dies at 93
▼ + stars: | 2023-12-01 | by ( Kelly Mclaughlin | Natalie Musumeci | ) www.businessinsider.com time to read: +6 min

Former Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor has died, the Supreme Court announced. AdvertisementFormer Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, who became the first woman to serve on the nation's highest court, died on Friday, the high court announced. Before her tenure on the nation's top court, O'Connor served as the Republican leader of the Arizona Senate. O'Connor retired from the Supreme Court in 2005O'Connor announced her retirement in 2005 after her husband was diagnosed with Alzheimer's. Former Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor testifies before the Senate Judiciary Committee on July 25, 2012 in Washington, DC.

Persons: Sandra Day O'Connor, O'Connor, —, John Roberts, " O'Connor, Roberts, Ronald Reagan, William Rehnquist, Rehnquist, John O'Connor, Sandra Day, David Hume Kennerly, Reagan, Casey, Gore, T.J . Kirkpatrick, Samuel Alito, George W, Bush, iCivics Organizations: Supreme, Service, trailblazer, Republican, The Associated Press, US, New, Associated Press, Stanford University, Stanford, Maricopa Superior Court, Court, Senate, Bollinger, Alzheimer's, Former Locations: Phoenix , Arizona, Arizona, New Mexico, Washington , DC, Maricopa, Washington, DC, Bush, Washington ,

This case requires us to determine whether the same rule applies to police encounters that take place on a bus. The mere fact that Bostick did not feel free to leave the bus does not mean that the police seized him. This court is not empowered to forbid law enforcement practices simply because it considers them distasteful. We therefore believe the district court erred in relying on whether the conduct ‘seriously affect plaintiff's psychological well-being’ ... As for the victims, the government now has license to transfer property from those with fewer resources to those with more.

Persons: Sandra Day O'Connor, Bostick, —, James Acton, Bollinger, ”, Rumsfeld, ’, James Madison, impartially Organizations: Florida Supreme, Systems, Law, Ritz, Carlton Locations: Florida, Hudson, New York, Harris, Davis, Vernonia, Acton, America, Hamdi, City of New London, ‘

☆ Look at What John Roberts and His Supreme Court Have Wrought Over 18 Years - The New York Times
▼ + stars: | 2023-07-09 | by ( Linda Greenhouse | ) www.nytimes.com time to read: +3 min

The justices have simply replaced Chevron’s rule of judicial deference with its polar opposite, a new rule that goes by the name of the major questions doctrine. But how to tell a major question from an ordinary one? The Heller decision in 2008 opened the Second Amendment door a crack, granting individuals the right to keep a handgun at home for self-defense. The question in the case is whether the Second Amendment allows the government to bar gun ownership by an individual under a restraining order for domestic violence. That the answer actually might be “no” — domestic violence wasn’t even a concept in the 18th century, when the Second Amendment was adopted — is too astonishing to contemplate.

Persons: Dobbs, Roe, Casey, Roberts’s, Thomas, ”, Neil Gorsuch, “, Heller, Chafing, can’t, wasn’t, — Organizations: Jackson, Health Organization, Wade, Chevron, Biden administration’s Locations: United States

☆ Opinion: The Supreme Court rewrites American society once again
▼ + stars: | 2023-06-30 | by ( Opinion Cnn Contributors | ) edition.cnn.com time to read: +25 min

But learning the facts - that affirmative action is critical for fostering equal access and opportunity in our academic institutions -cemented my belief that affirmative action is necessary if we want to create an equitable nation. The court’s decision Thursday is consistent with its view that race-based preferences should and would have a limited shelf life. Jon Wang, who revealed himself as a plaintiff in this Supreme Court case, was rejected by Harvard but was accepted at and is now attending Georgia Tech. Affirmative action enabled my ability to experience different ways of thinking and to form the lasting friendships I have made. Affirmative action has been a tool used by many countries to ensure underrepresented communities are included in areas they normally are not.

Persons: who’d, Tan, ”, Ana Fernandez, Richard Kahlenberg, Peniel Joseph, Peniel Joseph Kelvin Ma, Kelvin Ma, retrenchment, Bakke, Shelby, Holder, John F, Barry Goldwater, Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, Peniel, Joseph, Barbara Jordan, “, ” Lanhee Chen, Bollinger, Sandra Day O’Connor, Lanhee Chen Lanhee J . Chen, J, Chen, David, Diane Steffy, Romney, Ryan, Roxanne Jones, Andrew Johnson, Jones, WURD, Richard Sander, –, Richard Sander Fiona Harrison, Jeff Yang, Ed Blum’s, Jon Wang, Michael Wang, Williams, Jian Li, Bruce, Hudson Yang, Natasha Warikoo, Ketanji Brown Jackson, ” Natasha Warikoo Alonso Nichols, John Roberts, Brayden Rothe, Biden, can’t, Joe Biden, Brayden Rothe Patrick O'Leary, Pell Organizations: CNN, Fellows of Harvard College, Harvard, Harvard College, Cuban, American Council, Education, Wellesley College, Renaissance Studies, Black, Tufts University, Blacks, Ivy League, Federalist Society, John Birch Society, Trump, Democratic Party, GOP, Center, LBJ School of Public Affairs, University of Texas, Racial Justice, University of North, University of North Carolina Chapel, Public Policy, Hoover Institution, California State, Republican, Democratic, White, Fair, Supreme, ESPN The Magazine, ESPN, New York Daily News, Philadelphia Inquirer, The University of California, UCLA, University of California, UC, Georgia Tech, Department of Education, Princeton, Yale, Stanford, Princeton University, Institute for, Digital Intelligence, Harvard University, College, Social Sciences, of Sociology, Equity, University of Minnesota Locations: today’s, Philippines, Taiwan, Los Angeles, Portland, White, American, United States, West Linn , Oregon, Cuban American, Miami, Havana, Cuba, Miami , Florida, America, Austin, University of North Carolina, California, lockstep, Berkeley, Asian America, Florida, Texas

June 29 (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday struck down race-conscious admissions programs at Harvard University and the University of North Carolina, effectively prohibiting affirmative action policies long used to raise the number of Black, Hispanic and other underrepresented minority students on campuses. "Harvard and UNC admissions programs cannot be reconciled with the guarantees of the Equal Protection Clause," Roberts wrote, referring to the constitutional provision. Affirmative action had withstood Supreme Court scrutiny for decades, most recently in a 2016 ruling involving a white student, backed by Blum, who sued the University of Texas after being rejected for admission. Jackson did not participate in the Harvard case because of her past affiliation with the university. The ruling did not explicitly say it was overruling landmark precedent upholding affirmative action.

Persons: Constitution's, Edward Blum, Roe, Wade, John Roberts, Roberts, Blum, Donald Trump, Trump, Thursday's, Joe Biden's, Ketanji Brown Jackson, Jackson, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, Sotomayor, Peter Hans, Hans, Clarence Thomas, Bollinger, Andrew Chung, Will Dunham Organizations: U.S, Supreme, Harvard University, University of North, Harvard, UNC, Fair, Universities, University of Texas, Republican, America, Liberal, Jackson, Asian, Civil, University of North Carolina, Thomson Locations: University of North Carolina, U.S, States, Black, America, New York

For just as long, critics of affirmative action have questioned whether race-conscious admissions policies are fair or warranted. The Supreme Court weighed in on Thursday, striking down affirmative action policies at Harvard and the University of North Carolina. In 2014, he founded Students for Fair Admissions, the group behind several major Supreme Court challenges to affirmative action - including the cases that led to Thursday's decision. Connerly persuaded his fellow regents to ban affirmative action. He concluded that affirmative action as part of an approach that aimed to remedy historic disadvantages and did not favor unqualified applicants over qualified ones could still be used.

Persons: EDWARD BLUM Edward Blum, Blum, LEE BOLLINGER, Lee Bollinger, Society's, Bollinger, WARD CONNERLY, Jim Crow, Pete Wilson, Connerly, CHRISTOPHER EDLEY, Bill Clinton, Christopher Edley Jr, Clinton, Edley, Joseph Ax, Gabriella Borter, Sharon Bernstein, Donna Bryson, Leslie Adler Organizations: Harvard, University of North, Fair, University of Michigan, U.S, Bollinger, Columbia University, Universities, Republican, Regents, University of California, UC, American, JR, UC Berkeley's, Thomson Locations: University of North Carolina, U.S ., Grutter, Michigan, California, Louisiana, Sacramento

admissions programs cannot be reconciled with the guarantees of the equal protection clause,” Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. wrote for the majority. The court had repeatedly upheld similar admissions programs, most recently in 2016, saying that race could be used as one factor among many in evaluating applicants. The university responded that its admissions policies fostered educational diversity and were lawful under longstanding Supreme Court precedents. Writing for the majority, Justice Anthony M. Kennedy said that courts must give universities substantial but not total leeway in devising their admissions programs. The Texas decision essentially reaffirmed Grutter v. Bollinger, a 2003 decision in which the Supreme Court endorsed holistic admissions programs, saying it was permissible to consider race to achieve educational diversity.

Persons: “, John G, Roberts, ”, Sonia Sotomayor, Edward Blum, Antonin Scalia, Elena Kagan, Justice Anthony M, Kennedy, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen G, Breyer, Justice Sotomayor, Justice Kennedy, Brett M, Kavanaugh, Ginsburg, Amy Coney Barrett, Justice Breyer, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, Justice Jackson, Grutter, Bollinger, Sandra Day O’Connor, Clarence Thomas Organizations: Harvard, University of North, Civil, Asian, Fair, University of Texas Locations: University of North Carolina, North Carolina, Austin, Texas

PinnedThe Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that the race-conscious admissions programs at Harvard and the University of North Carolina were unlawful, curtailing affirmative action at colleges and universities around the nation, a policy that has long been a pillar of higher education. The university responded that its admissions policies fostered educational diversity and were lawful under longstanding Supreme Court precedents. Seven years later, only one member of the majority in the Texas case, Justice Sotomayor, remains on the court. Justice Jackson recused herself from the Harvard case, having served on one of its governing boards. The Texas decision essentially reaffirmed Grutter v. Bollinger, a 2003 decision in which the Supreme Court endorsed holistic admissions programs, saying it was permissible to consider race to achieve educational diversity.

Persons: Edward Blum, Antonin Scalia, Elena Kagan, Justice Anthony M, Kennedy, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen G, Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor, Justice Sotomayor, Justice Kennedy, Brett M, Kavanaugh, Ginsburg, Amy Coney Barrett, Justice Breyer, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, Justice Jackson, Grutter, Bollinger, Sandra Day O’Connor Organizations: Harvard, University of North, Civil, Asian, Fair, University of Texas Locations: University of North Carolina, North Carolina, Austin, Texas

☆ Clarence Thomas and Ketanji Brown Jackson criticize each other in unusually sharp language
▼ + stars: | 2023-06-29 | by ( Devan Cole | ) edition.cnn.com time to read: +6 min

Washington CNN —The Supreme Court’s landmark ruling Thursday on affirmative action pitted its two Black justices against each other, with the ideologically opposed jurists employing unusually sharp language attacking each other by name. Justice Clarence Thomas and the court’s other four conservatives joined Roberts’ opinion. Thomas has previously acknowledged that he made it to Yale Law School because of affirmative action, but he has long criticized such policies. (While Jackson recused herself from the Harvard case, she did hear the UNC case, and her dissent was focused on the latter.) In his memoir, “My Grandfather’s Son,” Thomas says he felt “tricked” by paternalistic Whites at Yale who recruited Black students.

Persons: John Roberts, Clarence Thomas, Roberts, Thomas, Ketanji Brown Jackson, ”, ” Thomas, “, Jackson, Sonia Sotomayor, Thomas ’, “ ‘, ” “, ” Jackson, Black, he’d Organizations: Washington CNN, Harvard, University of North, Yale Law School, UNC, CNN, Whites, Yale, “, University of Michigan Law School, White, Bollinger Locations: University of North Carolina, Independence, United States, Yale

☆ Affirmative Action Exposes the Secret Meaning of Equity
▼ + stars: | 2022-11-01 | by ( William Mcgurn | ) www.wsj.com time to read: 1 min

It’s taken too long, but the Supreme Court has finally put the progressive ideal of equity in the dock. In two separate cases Monday, the high court heard Students for Fair Admissions argue that Harvard’s and the University of North Carolina’s use of race preferences in admissions is unconstitutional and violates the 1964 Civil Rights Act. The plaintiffs are asking the court to overturn its 2003 decision in Grutter v. Bollinger, which upheld the use of race in admissions. Much of the attention in court Monday was on diversity. Less examined was the principle of equity, which undergirds it.

The Supreme Court on Monday wades into the decadeslong legal fight over affirmative action in cases challenging policies at the University of North Carolina and Harvard University, with the conservative majority expected to be open to ending the practice. The Supreme Court, which has a 6-3 conservative majority, will hear back-to-back oral arguments in the UNC and Harvard cases; the session is likely to last several hours. The arguments against affirmative action are being brought by a group called Students for Fair Admissions, led by conservative activist Ed Blum. The court shifted to the right following former President Donald Trump’s appointment of three conservative justices. If affirmative action is ended, those defending the practice say, race-neutral policies aimed at achieving diversity will often fail, leading to a decline in Black and Hispanic enrollment.

☆ Supreme Court's conservative majority seems open to eliminating affirmative action in university admissions process: 'Why do you have these boxes?'
▼ + stars: | 2022-10-31 | by ( Oma Seddiq | ) www.businessinsider.com time to read: +9 min

The Supreme Court heard two high-profile challenges to race-conscious university admissions processes. The court's conservatives appeared open to ending race as a factor in university admissions. Thomas, the second Black person to ever serve on the bench, has long been critical of race-conscious admissions policies. They cannot adopt race-conscious admissions and sit back reflexively and let that play out forever into the future," Prelogar said. "At present, it's not possible to achieve that diversity without race-conscious admissions, including at the nation's service academies."

☆ College use of race in admissions challenged at Supreme Court in arguments
▼ + stars: | 2022-10-31 | by ( Dan Mangan | ) www.cnbc.com time to read: +4 min

"Racial classifications are wrong," the attorney Patrick Strawbridge said in his opening argument on behalf of the group Students for Fair Admissions. The Supreme Court began hearing arguments Monday in two cases that challenge the use of race-based considerations to determine who gets admitted to American colleges. Conservatives hold a 6-3 super-majority on the Supreme Court and are expected to be open to the arguments for ending affirmative action. The cases being argued are Students for Fair Admissions v. President and Fellows of Harvard, case No. 20-1199, and Students for Fair Admissions v. the University of North Carolina, case No.

The court confronts this divisive issue four months after its major rulings curtailing abortion rights and widening gun rights. The court's 6-3 conservative majority is expected to be sympathetic toward the challenges to Harvard and UNC. The cases give the court an opportunity to overturn its prior rulings allowing race-conscious admissions policies. Blum's group said UNC discriminates against white and Asian American applicants and Harvard discriminates against Asian American applicants. UNC said there is a difference between a racist policy like segregation that separates people based on race and race-conscious policies that bring students together.

According to Harvard, around 40% of U.S. colleges and universities consider race in some fashion in admissions. The Supreme Court has been upheld such policies, most recently in a 2016 ruling involving a white woman who sued after the University of Texas rejected her. Ruling in favor of the plaintiffs could require the court to overturn its 2016 ruling and earlier decisions. 'DIVERSITY AND INCLUSION'The lawsuits accused UNC of discriminating against white and Asian American applicants and Harvard of discriminating against Asian American applicants. Circuit Court of Appeals found that Harvard's use of race was "meaningful" and not "impermissibly extensive" because it prevented diversity from plummeting.

☆ Supreme Court could eliminate affirmative action in university admissions as it considers high-profile challenges against Harvard and University of North Carolina
▼ + stars: | 2022-10-29 | by ( Oma Seddiq | ) www.businessinsider.com time to read: +7 min

Students for Fair Admissions wants the Supreme Court to eliminate race as a factor in university admissions. The Supreme Court will hear the two high-profile challenges on Monday. "I represent so many communities in which affirmative action benefits us all the time," Agustín León-Sáenz, a first-generation immigrant from Ecuador and a sophomore at Harvard, told Insider. The Supreme Court has over the years confronted the role of race in university admissions and repeatedly maintained the constitutionality of affirmative action. The Supreme Court is expected to hand down its decisions in the pair of cases by June.

Most court observers are expecting that the court’s 6-3 conservative majority will be sympathetic to the arguments against affirmative action being brought by a group called Students for Fair Admissions. Ed Blum, the anti-affirmative action activist who leads the group, said he hopes the court "will finally end these polarizing and unfair racial preferences in college admissions." The court shifted to the right following former President Donald Trump’s appointment of three conservative justices, creating the 6-3 conservative majority. Polanco joined other UNC alumni and current students in defending the existing admissions policy in court. They argue that the UNC admissions policy discriminates against white and Asian applicants and that the Harvard policy discriminates against Asians.

Search resuls for: "Grutter"

19 mentions found