After reading ÒWhat
Chief Justice Roberts Misunderstands About PhysicsÓ
________
The
Fisher v. University of Texas case is very simple and does not require a
heated emotional discussion (it also has nothing to do with physics or any
other subject), as long as we stick to a pure logic.
There
are only two alternatives to consider:
1.Everyone (literally!) who applies to a university gets
automatically accepted without any consideration.
or
2.From the people applying to a university some people are
accepted and some are not.
If
we select the latter choice we must set the selection process, which must
include parameters of such selection, for example an age, a GPA, etc., and the
ranges for each parameter (as well as a procedure to be used to make an
exception: for example, we can set the minimum age to 16 but consider and
accept a 13 year old genius).
The
process of selecting such parameters historically depends on the socioeconomic
views of the people making this selection, in this case - the Supreme Court
Justices.
The
first question the Court should answer is: ÒShould the race of a person be one
of the parameters to be considered for an applicantÓ?
This
question is one of many similar questions, such as: ÒShould the height of a
person be one of the parameters to be considered for an applicantÓ? ÒShould the
gender of a person be one of the parameters to be considered for an applicantÓ?
ÒShould the place of the birth of a person be one of the parameters to be
considered for an applicantÓ? ÒShould the credit score of a person be one of
the parameters to be considered for an applicantÓ? (you
can write dozens of more questions like that).
Every
such question is a ÒYesÓ or ÒNoÓ question and neither answer contradict the
Constitution of the United States, because - depending on specific
circumstances -either answers can be correct or wrong (assume, you answered
ÒNoÓ; but there always be a hypothetical situation which would require another
answer, which makes selecting ÒNoÓ legally impossible).
Which
leaves us with a simple conclusion; the Fisher v. University of Texas case is NOT a
constitutional case, it should not have been accepted by the Supreme Court in
the first place, but now, since it has been accepted, the ruling should dismiss
the case and let each state to do the same. And each state should dismiss a
similar case (if it would have been brought to the state court) and let each
university to draw its own policy.
P.S.
We need to keep in mind that when discussing a case Justices have to probe all
possible directions of reasoning, and sometimes they use their questions or
statements to provoke others and to draw them into a contradiction, plus, as
humans, sometimes they just want to have their own fun, so it is useless to
come to any conclusion based just on what they said or asked – until the
ruling is published we do not know what they really think.