<p>Which is how it should be. Something like that is discrimination.</p>
<p>A beginning of an end to affirmative action?</p>
<p>"A beginning of an end to affirmative action?"</p>
<p>I hope so!</p>
<p>The articles are kind of unsatisfying... They went off to talk about some death row guy and some price floor for food...</p>
<p>"A beginning of an end to affirmative action?"</p>
<p>NO, they agreed affirmative action was necessary just that the school districts were going to far.</p>
<p>I thought the Supreme Court WAS supposed to rule on the actual, big issue of Affirmative Action this summer?</p>
<p>This is the only AA-related case this summer, though some news commentators were predicting college-related challenges to come up within a year or two.</p>
<p>This disgusting ruling is the first step in overturning Brown v. Board of Education.</p>
<p>Um...not really... :P </p>
<p>I'm surprised they made a ruling that I wasn't unhappy with.</p>
<p>gotta love white america</p>
<p>I only wish they did this 3 years ago, when I was forced to go to a school literally across the city (San Francisco) because of this.</p>
<p>equality creates inefficiency. but how much inefficiency do we want in order to create this costly equality? this decision is the first step toward a series of others that will reform the current inept system of affirmative action</p>
<p>How is this supposed to reform affirmative action?</p>
<p>All they did was rule it that way so kids wouldn't ridiculously have to be dragged all the way across town instead of across the street for school. </p>
<p>"gotta love white america"</p>
<p>Ugh</p>
<p>Ok Roger....</p>
<p>I'm sure you know the flame this is going to turn into......</p>
<p>which, armando, i believe is a reform, of a previously inept aspect of "creating diversity" in exchange for inefficiency</p>
<p>This is actually supporting Brown v. Board.</p>
<p>The ruling declares that students cannot be sent to schools according to race alone, which is exactly what was happening in Topeka half a century ago and what is currently happening today in Kentucky. Kids are being sent on 3-hour bus rides because the cross-town school wants more black kids in it, or because there are too many white people living by their house. The new ruling stops forced actions that are motivated by race, just as Brown v. Board did.</p>
<p>"which, armando, i believe is a reform, of a previously inept aspect of "creating diversity" in exchange for inefficiency"</p>
<p>That's a personal bias though. You might think AA is inefficient, others might think it's fair. And college is optional, grade school is required. </p>
<p>The way I see it, this was only important because kids were being hassled to go across town for school instead of across the street.</p>
<p>Brown's ruling was that apartheid education was inheriently unequal, given the mistreatment of minorities in the housing system and in all aspects of American life. The concept of busing kids to predominetly white areas was seen as a remedy to gives children of color the same opputunities that white children were getting in neigborhoods that were on average more affulent. This hurts Brown because the concept of racial diversity is now seen as "reverse racism", and apartheid education may once again very well become society's accepted norm.</p>