Think the SC struck down "affirmative action"? Nope--but the Media wants voters to think it did

[sigh]  It's a sad truth that most people are far too easily fooled.

Latest example:  A few days ago the f'n Supreme Court issued a decision that the Lying Mainstream Media has wailed "ended affirmative action."  

The Mainstream Media wailed and screamed and moaned that this was the most awful thing since Christianity!  Claimed it wuz duh mos' awful thing EVAH!  Blamed the "conservative majority" on the court.

Except: the decision didn't end AA.  The cunning, anti-merit chief "justice," John Roberts, crafted a loophole allowing the equivalent of AA to continue, just not named as such.

Of course you don't believe that.  You think it's a "right-wing conspiracy theory."  Okay, have you read his "opinion" (i.e. decree)?  Ah, I didn't think so (except for one highschool classmate of mine who reads this).  So you're basing your conclusion on...what?  

Ah!  On what duh Mainstream Media has written about the decree, eh?  C'mon, be honest: you don't know fuck-all about what Roberts actually wrote, eh?

So...if you read the opinion you'll find Roberts cunningly, carefully created a huge loophole to allow race-based preferences in college admissions to continue.  The just won't call it "affirmative action."

(For young Americans: The "Affordable Care Act"--widely called Obozocare--*forced* every American to buy health insurance.  But the Constitution doesn't give the federal government the power to make Americans buy health insurance.  So without some legal magic, Obozocare was clearly unconstitutional.)

(When conservatives brought precisely that challenge to the SC, Obama's regime lawyers argued that the "individual mandate" was NOT a tax--because Obozo had promised--*promised*--that his vaunted command would NOT raise anyone's taxes at all!  But Roberts realized this would make obozocare unconstitutional.  To save it, Roberts RULED that the "individual mandate" in Obamacare was a tax, despite the fact that Obozo's attorneys had vehemently argued to the court that it was NOT a tax.  Roberts rejected the arguments of the regime's own attorneys because he knew that only by defining the "individual mandate" as a tax would Obamacare be Constitutional.  Clever, eh?  So this is the kind of cunning thinking you're up against.)

So...quoting from the just-issued RULING:  
>>...nothing in this opinion should be construed as prohibiting universities from considering an applicant’s discussion of how race affected his or her life, be it through discrimination, inspiration, or otherwise.>>

Obviously that's the loophole: Roberts RULED (via his majority opinion) that universities *may* consider "an applicant's "discurrion of how race affected his/her life."  Bingo.  And the black female president of Hahvahd has vowed to use that loophole to continue business as usual.

SO...all the wailing and hair-pulling by the Lying Mainstream Media about dis decision is designed to keep Democrats voting Dem, cuz dey t'ink dey needs ta replace duh alleged "conservative majority" wif sum gud liberals.  But the SC's *ruling* is a nullity: it does absolutely nothing--because of the cunning loophole crafted by Roberts.

Net effect: zero.

Source: Legal Insurrection

https://legalinsurrection.com/2023/06/scotus-gave-universities-a-narrow-opening-and-harvard-just-announced-its-going-to-drive-an-affirmative-action-truck-right-through-it/