Supreme Court Considers Ending Affirmative Action in College Admissions
Video Credit: Wibbitz Top Stories - Duration: 01:31s - Published
Supreme Court Considers Ending Affirmative Action in College Admissions
Supreme Court Considers Ending , Affirmative Action in College Admissions.
NBC News reports that on Oct.
31, Conservative justices questioned the practice.
They also sought to determine to
what extent new "race neutral"
admissions policies could be implemented.
The Conservative justices contend that such measures would improve racial diversity,
but Liberal justices disagree.
The Conservative justices contend that such measures would improve racial diversity,
but Liberal justices disagree.
Those in favor of the policy argue that if affirmative action is ended, Black and Hispanic enrollment will decline since race-neutral measures often fail.
.
Those challenging affirmative action have pointed out nine states in which the practice is banned but enrollment remains diverse.
.
What do you learn from the mere checking of the box?
, Justice Samuel Alito, to UNC lawyer Ryan Park, via NBC News.
Jutice Ketanji Brown Jackson stated that universities aren't considering applicants
"just because somebody checks a box.".
You haven’t demonstrated or shown one situation in which all they look at is race and take from that stereotypes and other things.
They are looking at the full person, Liberal Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, via NBC News.
Some Conservative justices said they'd be open to applicants referencing their race in essays to elaborate on their life experiences.
NBC News reports that a ruling is due by June 2023
Supreme Court Sides
With Biden Administration , in Social Media Case.
Attorneys general in Louisiana and Missouri, and other right-wing individuals, .
Attorneys general in Louisiana and Missouri, and other right-wing individuals, .
previously brought a lawsuit against the government, alleging that it had influenced what social media companies allow on their sites.
In particular, plaintiffs in the case of Murthy v. Missouri questioned whether the Biden administration violated free speech protections amid the pandemic when social networks were instructed to remove COVID misinformation.
In particular, plaintiffs in the case of Murthy v. Missouri questioned whether the Biden administration violated free speech protections amid the pandemic when social networks were instructed to remove COVID misinformation.
On July 4, 2023, Louisiana Judge Terry Doughty
agreed with the plaintiffs and restricted members of the Biden administration from interacting with social media companies in an attempt to moderate their content.
The U.S. Supreme Court struck
down the lower court's ruling by a vote of
6-3 on June 26, 'The Guardian' reports. .
The plaintiffs, without any
concrete link between their injuries
and the defendants’ conduct, , Justice Amy Coney Barrett, via majority opinion.
... ask us to conduct a review of the
years-long communications between dozens
of federal officials, across different agencies,
with different social-media platforms,
about different topics, Justice Amy Coney Barrett, via majority opinion.
This court’s standing doctrine
prevents us from ‘exercis[ing such]
general legal oversight’ of the
other branches of government, Justice Amy Coney Barrett, via majority opinion.
Ultimately, Justice Amy Coney Barrett wrote that the lower court "glossed over complexities in the evidence" and
"also erred by treating the defendants, plaintiffs
and platforms each as a unified whole.".
Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas
and Neil Gorsuch dissented.
Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas
and Neil Gorsuch dissented.
For months, high-ranking government officials
placed unrelenting pressure on Facebook to
suppress Americans’ free speech, Justice Samuel Alito, via dissenting opinion.
The Court, however, shirks that duty and thus
permits the successful campaign of coercion in
this case to stand as an attractive model for
future officials who want to control what
the people say, hear, and think, Justice Samuel Alito, via dissenting opinion
Credit: Wibbitz Top Stories Duration: 01:31Published
Supreme Court Rejects , Challenge to Tax Law on, Foreign Investments.
On June 20, the Supreme Court upheld a tax on foreign
corporate investments enacted by a Republican-controlled
Congress under former President Donald Trump.
On June 20, the Supreme Court upheld a tax on foreign
corporate investments enacted by a Republican-controlled
Congress under former President Donald Trump.
NBC reports that the case had attracted scrutiny when
conservative Justice Samuel Alito refused to recuse
himself despite ties with one of the challenging lawyers.
The case revolved around whether an individual can be
forced to pay taxes on investments in foreign-owned
companies regardless of if they were a source of income.
The case revolved around whether an individual can be
forced to pay taxes on investments in foreign-owned
companies regardless of if they were a source of income.
According to the 16th Amendment
of the Constitution, Congress has the
power to "collect taxes on incomes.".
In the case, Charles and Kathleen Moore claim they were
unfairly taxed on their $40,000 investment in an
India-based company called KisanKraft Machine Tools. .
While the company made a profit, the Moores
claim that they received no dividends and that
the money was reinvested in the business.
As a result, the Moores did not pay taxes between
2006 and 2017 on what the U.S. government later
defined as income from their investment. .
Due to a provision that was part of a major tax law
enacted by former President Donald Trump in 2017,
the Moores paid $15,000 in additional taxes.
They later sought a refund for that payment,
arguing that they had been unlawfully taxed
based on an increase in the value of a capital
investment not qualifying as income.
The couple's challenge was rejected
by the Supreme Court 7-2
Credit: Wibbitz Top Stories Duration: 01:30Published
The Supreme Court will hear arguments of affirmative action cases at the end of the month including the Harvard case against Asian American students. Kenny Xu, president of Color Us United, joins Greg..
![Supreme Court Sides With Biden Administration in Social Media Case [Video]](https://video.newsserve.net/300/v/20240626/1379711156-Supreme-Court-Sides-With-Biden-Administration-in-Social.jpg)
![Supreme Court Rejects Challenge to Tax Law on Foreign Investments [Video]](https://video.newsserve.net/300/v/20240620/1379117630-Supreme-Court-Rejects-Challenge-to-Tax-Law-on.jpg)
![Socialists and Liberals re-elect their leaders by acclamation, keeping the status quo [Video]](https://video.newsserve.net/300/v/20240625/1379598254-Socialists-and-Liberals-re-elect-their-leaders-by.jpg)
![The Supreme Court will hear arguments of affirmative action cases at the end of the month including the Harvard case against Asi [Video]](https://video.newsserve.net/300/v/20221006/1665027695-The-Supreme-Court-will-hear-arguments-of-affirmative.jpg)
![Will SCOTUS overturn affirmative action Ameer Benno Wake Up America [Video]](https://video.newsserve.net/300/v/20221002/1664671772-Will-SCOTUS-overturn-affirmative-action-Ameer-Benno-Wake.jpg)
