☰ Menu

Thank you for checking out the Mass Destruction blog. This blog is no longer being supported, updated and available on And has been discontinued.
You will be redirected in 10 seconds...

Blog of Mass Destruction

Court Sides With The White Grievance Industry.....Again

By The Reverend Published: April 23, 2014

When the Supreme Court issued it's Obamacare ruling, individual states were granted.....and for no obvious reason....the right to opt out of the Medicaid expansion provision of the law. Chief Justice Roberts argued that the individual mandate compelling all U.S. citizens to purchase health care insurance was legal and not optional....yet, in the same ruling, Roberts argued just the opposite when it came to Medicaid expansion and the states. States could simply opt out. The ruling was a hodgepodge of inconsistency searching for a unifying rationale.

Yesterday, the Court ruled that state referendums which violate equal protection rights or anti-discriminatory laws, are legal and constitutional.

In effect, the ruling says that universities may still employ the limited consideration of race authorized in previous Supreme Court rulings. But it also said that voters and legislators also have the right to curtail such plans. That it took five separate opinions totaling 102 pages written over six months to reach that result is a sign of how divided the court remains on the issue.

"This case is not about how the debate about racial preferences should be resolved," (Justice Kennedy) Kennedy wrote. "It is about who may resolve it."

Just as in the case of Medicaid expansion....the cowardly Court made the Michigan case about states rights. Rather than do their job, the Justices pushed responsibility to decide how minorities should be treated to individual state's white-majority voters.

"It is about who may resolve it." That is the same rationale used before the Civil War to justify nullification of federal laws southern state leaders didn't want to abide by.

If Michigan voters can pass a referendum which eliminates all racial preferences in deciding college admissions......then what is to prevent other state voters from passing referendums, say, which re-instate K-12 school segregation? Couldn't the Court argue that "the debate about K-12 segregation is not what this case is about, but instead, who may resolve it?"

Here's what the activist John Roberts said in 2009 following the Ricci white-grievance firefighter case ruling.....

“The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.”

Total rhetorical bullshite. Roberts hates affirmative action and believes that racism is all but been eliminated in just the last 50 years in a country where slavery and Jim Crow reigned for 200 a country where over 30 states have in recent years passed strict new voting laws determined to disenfranchise minority voters.

In Ricci, Roberts argued that the way to end discrimination was for the government to stop discriminating against whites when filling job openings in the public sphere. The hated-by-whites quota system was intended to reverse the centuries of open and often violent discrimination of blacks by whites. Roberts turned the intention of affirmative action law on it's head and sided with the white-majority-grievers.

Now with the Michigan college admissions ruling....the Court has offered a blank check to states who hate D.C. when a Democrat sits in the White initiate more white-grievance nullification laws. "The debate is about......who may resolve it."

No, the debate is for the heart and soul of the U.S.A. Will we welcome the new-old days where 50 individual white-majority states can legally discriminate against whomever they choose as long as they pass a law of nullification in a white-majority referendum vote?

Chief Justice John Roberts has led the gutting of the Voting Rights Act, a law passed to prevent the mostly white-ruled southern states from disenfranchising minority voters in their states. Roberts led the charge against public employment affirmative action in Ricci, arguing that it was whites who were being discriminated against. And now, Roberts has helped to form a convoluted ruling which says states can go back to a whites-decide paradigm when it comes to racial preferences in college admissions.

Those three rulings play right into the hands of the white-grievance-fueled Tea Party movement. An extremist movement whose primary complaint is too much government borrowing and spending on THOSE people.

What Americans should be grieving over......all Americans, white or the incompetence, the deception and the cynicism of the Roberts Court.



About This Blog

Prev Next