This is not the first time that the Supreme Court has dropped a bombshell. Not even the first time last year.

But Thursday’s ruling on affirmative action it’s a bomb without a doubt.

One that is set to detonate beneath this nation’s educational establishment. About time, too.

The case dates back almost a decade to the time in 2014 when a group of Asian American students started a lawsuit against Harvard University.

Students had been rejected by the university, despite having the best possible grades.

In addition, the whistleblowers noted that the number of Asian Americans at Harvard was similar each year, even as the number of Asian Americans increased.

In other words, it looked suspiciously like the university had a quota system.

Of course, Harvard went out of its way to deny these claims. Unfortunately, they were statements that everyone could see to be true.

Harvard, like most other educational institutions in this country, was desperately trying to increase the quotas of certain students, especially black Americans.

In doing so they inevitably had to discriminate against overachieving students. And while other groups also overperform, Asian Americans and Harvard did of course it is almost undeniable.

However, Harvard tried to deny it and fought as hard as they could to keep their selection criteria from being revealed.

The university claimed that these criteria constituted its “trade secrets”. They were right. But they went out anyway.

One revelation was that Harvard routinely flagged Asian Americans it hadn’t even invited for an interview on things like “character traits.”

By marking them as such, Harvard could reject the application for not being up to par.

The applicant had simply been racially judged. With clearly racist criteria. For an institution that claims to be acting in the name of “anti-racism”.

Over the course of a decade, the case ended up in the Supreme Court, which issued its verdict yesterday. In a 6-3 ruling, the Court said universities like Harvard are violating the 14th Amendment’s equal protection clause.

How Chief Justice Roberts wrote in his leading opinion: “The student should be treated based on his experiences as an individual, not based on race.

“Many universities have done the opposite for too long. And in doing so, they have wrongly concluded that the touchstone of an individual’s identity is not challenges overcome, skills acquired or lessons learned, but the color of their skin. Our constitutional history does not tolerate this choice.”

It’s hard to overstate how seismic this trial is. Not just Harvard, but almost every university in the country carrying out unconstitutional activities for years.

And not just universities. Just think of the many sectors of American life that have followed the same criteria and priorities as universities.

When he was mayor, Bill de Blasio attempted a radical overhaul of New York City’s special school programs to suit precisely these career paths. Public and private companies have done the same.

The most “progressive” companies in the United States, such as Google and Facebook, have participated in the same activities as Harvard.

Instead of focusing only on merit, everything in this country has ended up being about the person’s identity and not their competence.

So it’s fitting that one of the justices who disagreed with the ruling was the most recent appointee to the court: Ketanji Brown Jackson.

He disagreed with the other justices, especially Justice Clarence Thomas, with unusually strong language.

And though it might not be well to point it out, it must nevertheless be said here.

There is a reason why Justice Jackson might oppose the idea of ​​color-blind attitudes in America. Because the fact is that he is where he is today because of his sex and the color of his skin.

When President Biden had the opportunity to appoint a new Supreme Court justice, he immediately announced that he wanted to appoint a black woman to the court.

He didn’t say he wanted to appoint the best justice possible, whether they were white, black, Asian, male, female, or anything else. He specifically said he wanted a black woman. And that’s how Ketanji Brown Jackson got to where he is.

In other words, she is a beneficiary of the idea that has dominated the last few decades in America. Which is prioritizing race above all else.

It is an ideology that has deeply damaged this country’s ability to achieve and its position in the world.

Most other countries, especially our rivals, do not engage in such acts of self-harm. They are dedicated to being as competitive as possible on the world stage.

Only the United States of this generation has led the way in obsessing over people’s personal characteristics. Only this country has decided to prioritize everything but excellence.

In the process we have done an injustice to people of all races. We have done an injustice to the countless students whose careers have been held back because they are of the “wrong” race.

And we’ve done a deep disservice to students who are considered to be of the “correct” race (can you believe we even have to say that in 2023?).

How have black students and other priority students been disserviced? Because our institutions have suggested that perhaps they are not there because of their competence but because of the color of their skin.

In some cases this will be the case. In many others it won’t be, but it will have put a doubt in people’s hearts that will last like a cancer.

The Supreme Court made sense. The the racism of “anti-racists” has been exposed for what it is: unconstitutional and un-American.

The lessons to be learned from this trial should rip like a tide through this country and its institutions. long time