很久以前。。。

來源: 2023-07-01 20:27:17 [博客] [舊帖] [給我悄悄話] 本文已被閱讀:

2003年有一個Grutter v. Bollinger,那個案件是關於密西根大學法學院的錄取標準,最後判的是支持Affirmative Action,判決引用了軍隊領導層對法庭的陳述書,說在軍官培養中實行AA有利於軍隊的粘合力(言外之意軍隊不想看到一片白人軍官管一片黑人士兵),這個陳述當年很有名,報紙都有報道。

https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/539/306/#tab-opinion-1961290?

What is more, high-ranking retired officers and civilian leaders of the United States military assert that, "[b]ased on [their] decades of experience," a "highly qualified, racially diverse officer corps . . . is essential to the military's ability to fulfill its principle mission to provide national security." .....”

Just click on the link and search for "military", you'll find further discussion on this topic. 

所以現在基本上推翻了2003年的判決,推翻了Affirmative Action,大法官是怕被人罵說會影響到國家安全,所以特意開了這個例外。

但是,左派已經開始抱怨了,難道隻有少數民族士兵需要看到少數民族的軍官?少數民族不是也需要少數民族的醫生,律師和經理?就是說那麽去打仗你才講究提拔少數民族,為什麽少數民族不能上藤校當經理醫生律師?難道Walmart可以有幾個白人經理管一大堆黑人墨西哥人和穆斯林人也能維持粘合力?

很久以前,一個大法官說過這麽一句話:我們是最終判決不是因為我們不會出錯;我們不會出錯是因為我們是最終判決。言外之意,你理解也要執行,不理解也要執行。

The Supreme Court “We are not final because we are infallible, but we are  infallible only because we are final.” - ppt download