Do not let the "reverse discrimination" reverse our national progress

Clarence Page

Marlean Ames from Akron, Ohio, is not homosexual or member of a racial minority.

But, please, she emphasizes, do not hold this against her, as she claims that her employers have, while taking their case of “reverse discrimination” to the Supreme Court.

I wish her well. As an Afro -American man, I strongly oppose unfair discrimination against any race, sex or sexual preferences, although I also know that the accusation can be very difficult to prove.

Or, at least, it was. Ames’s case aims to change this and, given how much Washington’s High Court and Official Court have moved in recent years, she could hardly choose a more timely time to try.

The Supreme Court heard oral arguments last Wednesday in her case, Ames v. Ohio Department of Yourself Serviceswhich has drawn a lot of attention, because it could redefine how discrimination applications of all types are treated in accordance with Title VII of the 1964 civil rights Law.

The basic problem is whether the so-called “applicants of the majority group”, the legal language for white or heterosexual employees who support discrimination, are so unusual that they must meet a higher standard than other applicants in such cases.

The NAACP Legal Defense and Legal Education Fund has argued in a brief-the-COURT if different standards are suitable for majority and minority groups because minorities are historically the target of discrimination.

Prior to Ames’s trial, the lower courts were pronounced against it, finding that he could not meet this standard. Ames’s lawyers claim that the standard is unconstitutional.

As well as the Trump administration and other conservative legal groups.

The Biden Administration also submitted an AMICUS short In support of Ames’s position, as Juristnews He reported, “with the former lawyer General Elizabeth Precar, in agreement that the requirement of the substantive circumstances is not supported by the text of Title VII.”

On the other hand, there were conservative groups such as America First Legal America, founded by Trump’s protrusion, Stephen Miller, who campaigned against the Dei programs as well as well known his campaign to strengthen border restrictions.

“He is very suspicious at this time of employment based on” diversity, equity and inclusion, “he said, that minority groups are facing more discrimination in this job than the majority groups.

This weak praise is a back tribute for the success of DEI campaigns, even while many Americans still scratch their heads in confusion about what is really.

In view of the debates on civil rights and for about half a century, I am remembered by the best known case of reverse discrimination: regent of the University of California against Bakke, the case of the Supreme Court of Landmark, which challenged the use of racial quotas in admitting the college.

The court was pronounced in favor of Bakke, finding that the University’s affirmative action program violated the law on civil rights and the 14th amendment.

When the High Court was pronounced against specific racial levels, many defenders of these policies mourned the beginning of the end for civil rights reforms. Instead, the effort to protect and defend civil rights continues despite periodic impulses, but also with many refinements and improvements.

Since more people seem to quote Martin King Jr.’s immortal plea of the immortal plea of ”all men” to be “not judged by their skin color, but by the content of their character”, it is reminded that it is not descriptive on the present as full for a better future.

The best way to get there as Americans is to help each other, because we work together, despite our many divisions and not to lose too much energy trying to leave each other.

In this spirit, I wish Marlene Ames well and I hope the Supreme Court will be wise in his decision. There is nothing simple in terms of racial, sex and other conflicts, but finding solutions together, despite our small differences served us well in the past and can still work again, if we can build faith in each other.

Marlean Ames assumed a complicated task, trying to make his way through our national history, group conflicts and tribal rivalries, looking for what we want most: peace and justice.

I just hope that the Supreme Court will come up with a decision that, even if we don’t like it, we can work with it.

Let’s hope.

Email Clarence Page to [email protected].