Grutter vs. Bollinger: Reverse Discrimination

Barbara Grutter, a white student filed suit against the University of Michigan Law school after she was rejected in 1996. She claimed that she was discriminated against based on her race, which is in violation of the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. She claimed that she was rejected because the University used race as a major factor for admissions, giving minorities a greater chance to be admitted even if their credentials were the same as a white applicant. The defendant was Lee Bollinger who at the time was the President of the university.

The University’s policy was to make “special efforts” to increase the numbers of African American, Native American and Hispanic students who without some preference, “might not be represented in the student body is meaningful numbers.” (www.aamc.org/diversity/amicusbrief.pdf) The District court first ruled that the school’s ethnic-based admissions program violated the fourteenth amendment and title VI and that there was “mathematically irrefutable proof that race is indeed an enormously important factor” (www.aamc.org/diversity/amicusbrief.pdf) in the university’s quest to meet it’s goal of minority admissions.

The Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that Michigan’s admissions policy is constitutional and that there was nothing wrong with implementing policies to ensure diversity.

http://www.npr.org/news/specials/michigan/

Pacific Heights Blog

I understand that the couple that bought the house was enticed by the tenants promise of advanced cash payment. However they should have never rented to him without doing a credit check and having him fill out an application, now they are stuck with him living there and they don’t even know if that is his real name or not. The first red flag was that the tenant claimed to have spoken to the wife when in fact he never did but he somehow knew her name. The second red flag was that he refused to fill out an application or credit check, but he flashed a couple of thousand dollar bills so that seemed to be enough for Drake. Unfortunately they never saw any of that money and now they have a real creep on their hands.

They should have never let him in until they received the security deposit and first months rent, but I guess they never really let him in, he let himself in, changed the locks and cut off communication with his landlords until they shit the power and heat off on him, which gave the tenant the upper hand and allowed him to make the landlords look unreasonable and angry. Now he stole their cat and is breeding cockroaches and there is nothing that they can do about it. I don’t understand how it was legal for him to change the locks, but I suppose since they don’t even have a lease that states he can’t do that then he can do whatever he wants. They are faced with a long expensive legal battle to get him evicted and who knows what this guy is going to do in the mean time.

Smash Me Doll

I would love to have a smash me Alex Rodriguez doll. Yes, I’m sure tons of professional athletes use or have used steroids. But to sit at a press conference and say that you didn’t know what you were injecting in to your body was steroids is completely insane. To also say that you didn’t know if it even enhanced your performance while you were taking them? Of course you knew what it was and of course it made you perform better or you wouldn’t have taken them for 3 YEARS. Stop playing innocent, you're not very good at it.

And yes, I am a red sox fan, but would be saying this even if I wasn't.

Greed is Good?

Well of course it’s beneficial to yourself to be greedy. But is it beneficial to the people around you? When I think of the word greedy, I immediately think of children. There’s always that one kid who hoards all the toys. Sure, he gets to play with all the cool stuff, but how do all the other kids around him feel? It’s safe to say that he’s not the most popular person in the class. Which leads to an entirely different question, is it more important to have all the toys, or to have friends? That can be easily related back to businesses. Sure you can make a lot of money, but if you don’t give back and are greedy, you might not have the important business relationships that are necessary to survive. In class today we were talking about returns to a store. Yes, a company has to take back defective or damaged merchandise, but they don’t have to take something back just because you don’t want it any more. They do this though to form good business relationships with their customers. If they were driven completely by greed though, they would not take unwanted merchandise back. Yes, they would keep that money on that sale, but chances are they lost any future business with that customer. “While a merchant might prefer to sell for cash with no return privilege, if the seller’s competitors are willing to allow prospective customers a trial period or the right of return, the seller must also do so to remain competitive.” (Essentials of Business Law, Liuzzo. Pg 216) Short term, they keep their money, but in the long term they end up losing business.

It also goes back to previous discussions that we had about ethics and morals. “Morals are concerned with behavior as judged by society.” (Essentials of Business Law, Liuzzo. Pg 19). It makes me wonder if there is a way to be wealthy and successful while being ethical and sticking to your personal moral code. Would I love to be rich? Of course, but would I rather have the respect of my peers and associates? Absolutely, and I think in the end, that will make me more successful.

Response to MySpace blog entries:

“It was also stated that the mother had used the account to spread rumors and vilify the girl over the internet. I wonder, could this not be seen as a form of defamation?” ShrimpGirl Productions
What Lori Drew did seems like a textbook definition of defamation. She knowingly wrote hurtful and malicious things about Megan. Putting Megan’s medical history aside, these statements would be crushing to any teenager, especially coming from a love interest. Then when you factor in Megan’s already fragile medical state, they are particularly devastating. These statements were published on the Internet where anyone could see. Even if Megan’s profile were set to private, all of her friends on MySpace would be able to see what Lori Drew wrote.

“Next who is really at blame for the suicide of the young girl? Is it the parents or the individual that acted out the hoax? The young girl named Megan, having been diagnosed with a few emotional disorders, was a child that her parents should have paid closer attention to.” Raw Impact Designs
I disagree with this statement. All of the articles about the case show that the parents did pay a lot of attention to both Megan’s mental state, and he use of the internet. She was upfront and honest with her mother about the made up boy “Josh Evens”, her mother warned her to be cautious since she didn’t even know this person. Now think back to when you were a teenager, would you have even been that up front and honest with your parents? I know I didn’t tell my parents about every boy I had a crush on or every time I got my feelings hurt. There is no way that Megan’s parents could have spent every waking minute with their daughter and have monitored her every move.

“The story of the young girl who committed suicide because of a failed internet romance is sad but the thing that is sadder is the fact that the women who created the hoax feeling no remorse for what she had done.” JV Home Design
I believe that Lori Drew never intended for Megan to commit suicide, and I understand that this was meant to be harmless but got out of control. What I don’t understand is how she is not remorseful at all, especially since she is a mother herself. How does she not put herself in Megan’s parent’s shoes? She hasn’t even had the decency to tell the Meier’s that she is sorry for what she has done. She’s a very lucky that there weren’t any laws yet to prosecute her for a felony. Hopefully if this happens again, the person responsible will be held accountable.

“The mother was unaware that Megan had mental problems such as Depression and weight issues but the mother didn’t feel like she did anything wrong so she did not apologize to Megan’s family.” Vividmotive
Not knowing that Megan suffered from depression and self esteem issues is not a valid defense for what Lori Drew did. Even a perfectly healthy teenage girl would be heartbroken if a boy she liked did this to her, and any reasonable human being would know that. In a small town, I find it hard to believe that she didn’t have any prior knowledge of Megan’s emotional conditions, however there is no way to prove that.

List of Crimes From Used Cars

Jaclyn Donatelli
Evelyn Lee
Brittany Hill
Sky Diaz

1. Assault
2. Vandalism
3. Assault of a police officer
4. Evading arrest
5. Leaving the scene of an accident
6. Unlicensed driving
7. Attempted murder
8. Reckless driving
9. Speeding
10. Child endangerment
11. Trespassing
12. Driving under the influence
13. Illegal gambling on a sports game
14. Unlicensed transactions
15. Agreements that interfere with public service
16. Transaction of over $500 with out a written agreement
17. Misrepresentation
18. Conspiracy
19. Illegal restraints of trade
20. Negligence
21. Perjury
22. False advertising
23. Destruction of Property
24. Alluding arrest
25. Nuisance
26. Fraud