Current Events > Most Americans approve of Supreme Court's decision on affirmative action

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/americans-approve-supreme-court-decision-restricting-race-college/story?id=100580375

A majority of Americans approve of the Supreme Court ruling restricting the use of race as a factor in college admissions, though the country is more divided on other high-profile rulings and increasingly viewing the court as driven more by politics than the law, according to a new ABC News/Ipsos poll conducted using Ipsos' KnowledgePanel.

On Thursday, the Supreme Court set new limits on affirmative action programs in cases involving whether public and private colleges and universities can continue to use race as one factor among many in student admissions.

A little more than half of Americans 52% -- approve of the U.S. Supreme Court decision on restricting the use of race as a factor in college admissions, while 32% disapprove and 16% saying they don't know.

A majority of Republicans (75%) and independents (58%) approve of the ruling, while a distinct minority of Democrats approve (26%).

And there are deep divisions between racial groups. Most white people (60%) and Asian people (58%) approve of the Supreme Court's decision to limit the use of race in college admissions, while only 25% of Black people support the decision. Hispanic people are split, with 40% approving and 40% disapproving.

Things shouldnt be decided based on someones skin color

VampireCoyote posted...

Things shouldnt be decided based on someones skin color

This logic only functions in an ideal society where black and hispanics/latinos are actually viewed/treated as equals entitled to the same privileges as white people. Hence, why AA existed in the first place even though progress moved at snail pacing.

Spoilers: they're not.

Its kind of complicated--i dont agree with just getting rid of it but i also hate the idea that a solution to poverty is "let a small number of people escape from those conditions. The ones that remain dont deserve anything better"

Jagr_68 posted...

This logic only functions in an ideal society where black and hispanics/latinos are actually viewed/treated as equals entitled to the same privileges as white people. Hence, why AA existed in the first place even though progress moved at snail pacing.

Spoilers: they're not.

Things still shouldnt be decided based on someones skin color.

The average American doesn't know what the fuck they're talking about when it comes to SCOTUS or the government

As such, this poll is meaningless

VampireCoyote posted...

Things still shouldnt be decided based on someones skin color.

Well they are. This nation was founded on it.

most americans would not qualify to attend regardless because our education system here is kinda terrible

Approve, I was never a fan of things like affirmative. Being chosen for something not due to ones ability amd hard work but just to meet a quota never never felt right to me.

SaikyoStyle posted...

Well they are. This nation was founded on it.

Time to cut it out. People should be judged by their actions and character.

VampireCoyote posted... Things still shouldnt be decided based on someones skin color.

Red states disagree with you.

*edit* not really arguing here but just emphasizing that AA was a band-aid to the bigger problem the country doesn't feel the need to actually tackle.

The more I think about it, the less I care about this specific ruling. I don't even think most state schools use AA. It's been banned in California for decades already.

This was mainly about elite private schools like Harvard. If Harvard truly cared about increasing diversity, they have ways to do it that's much better than AA.

kawalimus posted...

Its kind of complicated--i dont agree with just getting rid of it but i also hate the idea that a solution to poverty is "let a small number of people escape from those conditions. The ones that remain dont deserve anything better"

Something along these lines.

You shouldn't be granted special privileges (solely) on the basis of race, but at the same time there are way too many people set hard on restricting people on the basis of race.

The only truly fair, blind alternative I can think of that would be effective would be (needlessly) complex and complicated

VampireCoyote posted...

Things shouldnt be decided based on someones skin color

And I ride a unicorn to work.

It should be based on class, not skin color. Even if AA helped people, it was discriminatory to many people who needed the help as well by design.

The only exception I can consider is free college for native Americans. They're owed it.

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/5/4/8/AAYofGAAEnyc.png

VampireCoyote posted...

Things still shouldnt be decided based on someones skin color.

If cops approach a group of mixed race people to question them, a white person should be the one to talk to engage.

Garioshi posted...

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/5/4/8/AAYofGAAEnyc.png

Pretty much that.

I'd agree AA wasn't needed if blacks and Hispanics weren't treated like shit.

VampireCoyote posted...

Things shouldnt be decided based on someones skin color

And yet look at America's entire history

It always becomes "everyone is the same, people should earn things on merit" as soon as a minority is given a leg up. Crickets when they're being deliberately held back by their differences.

58% isn't a high majority for support. It shouldn't be surprising that while people support it the most considering they are effected the least by it.

hockeybub89 posted...

And yet look at America's entire history

It always becomes "everyone is the same, people should earn things on merit" as soon as a minority is given a leg up. Crickets when they're being deliberately held back by their differences.

Oh no, it's not crickets. It's a bunch of people gaslighting and telling you they didn't earn it which is why they are treated like garbage.

Prismsblade posted...

Approve, I was never a fan of things like affirmative. Being chosen for something not due to ones ability amd hard work but just to meet a quota never never felt right to me.

How do you feel about rich people who buy their kids' way into ivy league universities?

VampireCoyote posted...

Time to cut it out. People should be judged by their actions and character.

They should, but they are not.

And the current SCOTUS rulings and the trajectory of the GOP is going to keep ensuring that.

The majority of Americans are very uneducated on how AA works. Even I used to be. A lot of people think (which I also bought into) was that all things equal, if there's a choice between a black person and white person, always accept/hire the black person. If this is the definition they're working under, it makes sense that a majority would approve, especially Asian students who bought into thinking they were unfairly disadvantaged in AA.

Prismsblade posted...

Being chosen for something not due to ones ability amd hard work but just to meet a quota never never felt right to me.

That's never happened, though? Why do people like you assume the person who got in didn't work hard?

Ah, the old "someone LESSER than me JUMPED OVER me to fill a QUOTA!" cliche

Based on my admittedly limited knowledge of it I agree,but it doesn't change that it happened through a corrupted and broken system.

I understand the idea that stuff like AA is "unfair" because its a band-aid solution to a much bigger problem. But its deluded to act like just removing it solves any of these issues unless you just want to make the people benefitting suffer.

VampireCoyote posted...

Things still shouldnt be decided based on someones skin color.

Before AA things were decided based on someones skin color. Which is worse, unfairly denying minorities because theyre minorities or giving them unfair advantages through things like AA?

Garioshi posted...

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/5/4/8/AAYofGAAEnyc.png

/topic

Cory898 posted...

Before AA things were decided based on someones skin color. Which is worse, unfairly denying minorities because theyre minorities or giving them unfair advantages through things like AA?

Definitely unfair advantage but there are better ways to do it, particularly if it was focused on class instead of race.

VampireCoyote posted...

Things shouldnt be decided based on someones skin color

Agreed. But that doesn't change the fact that they are.

VampireCoyote posted...

Things still shouldnt be decided based on someones skin color.

Agreed. But that still doesn't change the fact that they are.

VampireCoyote posted...

Time to cut it out. People should be judged by their actions and character.

Agreed. But that doesn't change the fact that people aren't judged solely by their actions and character.

RuneterranSnap posted...

Definitely unfair advantage but there are better ways to do it, particularly if it was focused on class instead of race.

Then you'd have mediocre middle-class kids crying about "the poors" leapfrogging them to fill a quota

Prismsblade posted...

Approve, I was never a fan of things like affirmative. Being chosen for something not due to ones ability amd hard work but just to meet a quota never never felt right to me.

So when are you going to fix the racism black people face ?

cjsdowg posted...

So when are you going to fix the racism black people face ?

As soon as the supreme court fixes how easily rich and privileged kids get into schools. It's about merit right?

Fucking lols.

EthanSilver posted...

As soon as the supreme court fixes how easily rich and privileged kids get into schools. It's about merit right?

Fucking lols.

The fact that in Harvard, 6% of the population is Black, and around 30% or legacies. And the only thing people are bitching about is AA. Says it all.

Pretty much. It's not about "fairness" with the SC or Republicans. Never is.

Euripides posted...

Then you'd have mediocre middle-class kids crying about "the poors" leapfrogging them to fill a quota

Well them I don't care about. I'm more focused on ensuring the help gets to those who need it, which - and if in wrong feel free to correct me - doesn't seem to be the case with AA.

cjsdowg posted...

So when are you going to fix the racism black people face ?

I'm pretty sure it IS over. We've had a black president. They've gutted the voting rights act because states can be trusted to not negatively impact black and minority voters, and now they got rid of affirmative action because they don't need help. What more do you want from them!

cjsdowg posted...

The fact that in Harvard, 6% of the population is Black, and around 30% or legacies. And the only thing people are bitching about is AA. Says it all.

They got Asians mad at that 6% too. "they're the ones taking your spot, not the legacies!" In fact, I'm pretty sure that's SMAL's origin story.

Cory898 posted...

Before AA things were decided based on someones skin color. Which is worse, unfairly denying minorities because theyre minorities or giving them unfair advantages through things like AA?

It doesnt need to be either of those things, and shouldnt be.

RuneterranSnap posted...

Well them I don't care about. I'm more focused on ensuring the help gets to those who need it, which - and if in wrong feel free to correct me - doesn't seem to be the case with AA.

Because when things are meant to help multiple people POC get ignored anyway. Look at something like bailouts for black farmers versus white farmers as another example.

Class base system doesn't work because the US is still too racist at its core.

VampireCoyote posted...

It doesnt need to be either of those things, and shouldnt be.

And nobody should hurt anybody.

What, are you five years old?

It happens, unfairness. The conversation is in how we go about addressing these disparities.

Not in throwing around empty platitudes that don't live in actuality.

RuneterranSnap posted...

Definitely unfair advantage but there are better ways to do it, particularly if it was focused on class instead of race.

Ah yes, I am sure the people mad that supposed unqualified black people were getting admitted, would have much more love for AA if it was used to help poor people instead.

VampireCoyote posted...

It doesnt need to be either of those things, and shouldnt be.

Cool. It is those things though.

EthanSilver posted...

And nobody should hurt anybody.

What, are you five years old?

It happens, unfairness. The conversation is in how we go about addressing these disparities.

Not in throwing around empty platitudes that don't live in actuality.

And to me, seeing something like 60% whites agree AA should be removed to me reads as "60% of white Americans are ignorant." Which when you consider how people vote? Checks out.

ArtiRock posted...

Because when things are meant to help multiple people POC get ignored anyway. Look at something like bailouts for black farmers versus white farmers as another example.

Class base system doesn't work because the US is still too racist at its core.

Fair enough.

ArtiRock posted...

And to me, seeing something like 60% whites agree AA should be removed to me reads as "60% of white Americans are ignorant." Which when you consider how people vote? Checks out.

A demographic of people who are constantly pummeled with messaging about how "those people are taking your jobs" and "those people are here illegally" and "those people hate America" thinks AA is a bad idea? Cah-RAY- zee!!

Heineken14 posted...

I'm pretty sure it IS over. We've had a black president. They've gutted the voting rights act because states can be trusted to not negatively impact black and minority voters, and now they got rid of affirmative action because they don't need help. What more do you want from them!

Before I reply to you. Are you bullshitting right now. Are is this your real feelings be honest because I want to give you a reply. But I have issues writing and I don't want to waste my time if you are just trolling .

cjsdowg posted...

Before I reply to you. Are you bullshitting right now. Are is this your real feelings be honest because I want to give you a reply. But I have issues writing and I don't want to waste my time if you are just trolling .

Heineken is being sarcastic, I'm pretty sure. Or more around the lines that just because we've had a black president, doesn't mean racism is over.