Krauthammer on AA

Charles Krauthammer makes an excellent point in his column today in WaPo on the Michigan case. He points out that while the ruling leaves affirmative action in place, and provides a rather muddled definition of how it can be implemented, it doesn't actually mandate the policy.

By allowing, and not mandating, the Court leaves the possibility open, whether it intended to or not, for legislatures to do away with affirmative action. So, Texas' 10% rule, or California's lack of AA still stands, and either could be adopted by other states. So, as he points out, unlke Roe the Michigan AA case doesn't take the issue out of the hands of the political process.

Let's remember: The court did not mandate affirmative action. It only permitted affirmative action. The people and the politicians are entirely empowered to do away with it. True, the abolition movement has slowed since its successes in California and Washington, and most of the political class -- both Democratic and Republican -- lacks the courage to take up the fight.