Affirmative Action Is Nothing But Legalized Racial Profiling

April 5, 2012 byGiacomo

21 Comments

In a move that surprised me, the 9^th US Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against affirmative action.  Known to be the most liberal federal court in America, they have a history of ruling for minorities and against mainstream America, but in this rare instance, they actually made the right ruling.
In 1996, Californians voted to place a ban on affirmative action.  Advocates of the initiative claimed that it was a racist practice and I whole heartedly agree.
Supporters of affirmative action claim that normal policies of hiring and college entrance hurt minorities and poor people, so they should be given preferential treatment over non-minority and/or non-impoverished individuals.
Every place I’ve ever worked has the Equal Opportunity Employment signs posted somewhere for everyone to see.  It clearly states that race, religion and gender cannot be used to discriminate against anyone in the workplace.  I use to have insurance, securities and mortgage licenses and for each one of them I had to know not to use any form of discrimination or preferential treatment based upon race, religion and gender.  To do so was in violation of federal law.

So someone please explain to me how any form of affirmative action can be legal?  How can giving someone an advantage over someone else based upon race or gender not be a violation of the same laws stated on the EOE signs or those that affect the licenses I once held?
To target someone and give them preferential treatment on the basis of race or gender is racial or sexual profiling.  Supposedly the practice of racial and sexual profiling are illegal.
The Department of Justice is using racial profiling charges against Sheriff Joe Arpaio in Arizona in their attempts to keep him from pursuing the Obama birth certificate issue.   Their charges of illegal racial profiling are based upon their claims that he is unduly aiming his law enforcement efforts at Hispanics.  They fail to take into consideration that over 90% of the illegal aliens in his county are Hispanic and that at least 75% of the drug trafficking is also carried out by Hispanics, so how do you try to do your law enforcement job without targeting them?
I guess the advocates of affirmative action (mostly liberal Democrats and minorities) only want racial profiling when it works in their favor, but not the other way around.  They only want the positive aspect of it but not the negative.  But all I can say is that it’s wrong both ways and I’m shocked and delighted that the 9^th US Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the voter approved ban on affirmative action in California.