supreme court affirmative action

One Supreme Court decision does not cure 400 years of racism, and in fact, immediately after the decision, it was clear that some in our society still don't get it.
The Supreme Court's decision to uphold the program benefits the women who fought against it most of all.
By expanding the notion of diversity to include those who are economically and socially diverse, colleges would be admitting a much more heterogeneous student body and may actually come closer to achieving their goals.
Although I often disagree with Justice Scalia, and although I emphatically disagree with him about the constitutionality of affirmative action, the outrage and condemnation sparked by this comment is completely unwarranted.
Justice Scalia should know better; if nothing other than judicial temperament could guide him, he should know that a wise judge must think twice before opening his mouth to say something really stupid and highly prejudicial in front of the parties arguing their case before him.
Here we go again.
The plaintiffs and their supporters would have you believe that racial discrimination and hatred are things of the past. They regard affirmative action as "reverse racism," as though such a thing can possibly exist. Racism requires power and privilege, attributes in short supply in communities of color.
We should all be paying close attention to the Fisher case, not just because of what it means for future of diversity at the University of Texas, but because of the potential impact it could have on the ability of colleges and universities across the country to welcome student bodies that reflect the full diversity of America.
When it comes to affirmative action, we remain stuck on simple. This is part of a national trend where we keep debating seemingly straightforward, and long-resolved, questions and therefore are unable to tackle the harder questions that could bring us closer to true equality.