Is Supreme Court determined to show no bias by p’o-ing everybody?

The Supreme Court of the United States issued a pair of rulings on Thursday determined to give everybody something they can be truly appalled by.

The nation’s high court made a purely partisan political ruling that upheld a lower court’s efforts to interfere with President Barack Obama’s attempts at imposing reform of our nation’s immigration policies.

YET BEFORE THE ideologue twits who fantasize of the day they can deport all the foreigners out of the U.S. of A. could get themselves too excited, the high court dumped all over their desires with another case.

In that case, they upheld a lower court that had found fault with the University of Texas system and the way it took a student’s race or ethnicity into account during admissions.

This was provoked by the case of a would-be Longhorn who didn’t get accepted to attend that college, and claimed that as a white girl she was discriminated against because other people who were not white (and were nowhere near as qualified as she was, to listen to the racially-motivated ideologues) got her spot.

So which way do the ideologues lean?

ARE THEY HAPPY that the immigration reform measure got stalled? I doubt it. They’re such a miserable lot, those ideologue types, that I suspect they get their joy from complaining.

So they’ll be convinced that Thursday was a great day of disaster because some white girl (who as it turned out got into her Number Two choice of colleges and has since graduated and gotten on with her life) was devastated beyond belief – all to benefit a less-deserving non-white student.

This particular issue has always bugged me, perhaps because I remember how competitive the college admissions process can be (and I always considered myself fortunate to have been accepted by every college I applied to – including my top pick).

The fact is that the real sign of success is how one handles rejection throughout life. I’d argue the girl in this particular case did alright.

IT’S A SHAME she allowed herself to be used by ideologues determined to believe that the old order of society is somehow being picked upon because they’re no longer allowed to automatically prevail!

That particular ruling came out in favor of sense largely because one of the justices – Elena Kagan – had to recuse herself from the ruling because she was involved in arguing the case’s merits when she was U.S. solicitor general. Hence, we got  4-3 court ruling.

Otherwise, it could have suffered the same 4-4 vote that resulted in the high court messing with Obama’s efforts to deal with flaws existing in the immigration policy. Those people living in this country without valid visas who could show they have not caused problems while living here would have been granted work permits and would not face threat of deportation.

A concept that the ideologues find absolutely abhorrent. We might as well suggest that their political deity, Ronald Reagan, supported the dreaded “A” word of amnesty for immigration law violators.

WELL, ACTUALLY, HE did. Way back in 1986, although his policy didn’t go quite far enough in creating a sensible policy for newcomers wishing to come to this country – the fresh blood that our nation perpetually needs in order to maintain its high standards.

OBAMA: Another partisan political defeat

The court came down on partisan lines, and is being touted as the ultimate example of how the high court’s refusal to fill the vacancy caused by the death of Justice Antonin Scalia back in February is impacting policy negatively.

The vote was split even, meaning a majority did not uphold the lower court ruling. But a majority also did not uphold the president’s desires. In short, the issue remains in limbo. Something for political people to continue to quarrel over while real people are impacted negatively.

Which makes me wonder if that is truly the high court’s intentions these days – the ultimate ‘do nothing’ court for a society that at times seems to be going nowhere.

  -30-