Another day, another time the Supreme Court surprises everyone. While the divided court issued a serious blow to immigrants, their families, and the Obama administration, it did decide to save an important protection for minorities  affirmative action.The Court, and a 4 to 3 decision (Kagan did not participate), upheld the University of Texas  practice of considering race a factor in admissions.The’surprise decision was written by Justice Anthony Kennedy, a Reagan appointee, and joined by Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor and Stephen Breyer.Dissenting was Clarence Thomas, John Roberts and Samuel Alito.Kennedy, writing in the Court s opinion, warned that while it may use race as a factor in admissions, it may not be the only determining factor:The Court s affirmance of the universities admissions policy today does not necessarily mean the University may rely on that same policy without refinement. It is the University s ongoing obligation to engage in constant deliberation and continued reflection regarding its admissions policies.The case stemmed from an incident in 2008 when a high school graduate was denied admission to the University of Texas at Austin. The’student, Abigail Fisher, who is white, alleged that she was a victim of racial discrimination. At the time, UT had a program that automatically accepted the top 10 percent of high school graduates, and took in other factors such as scores and extracurricular activities. Fisher, who scored in the top 12 percent, felt she was unfairly denied even though she had 1180 out of 1600 on her SAT, and volunteered for Habitat for Humanity.In other words, she felt entitled. And, whenever a white person is a  victim  of  discrimination,  they want to cry  racism  and throw everyone else under the bus.This decision was the’second time the Supreme Court took up the case. The first time, the Court sent the case back to the lower system for further review. When the’same conclusion was met, the Court agreed to hear it once more. The first time, however, all Justices except for Ginsburg agreed (Kagan, again, recused herself). Ginsburg s dissent chided the Court for ignoring precedence and racial history:Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote a dissenting opinion in which she argued that the University s admission policy treats race as merely one factor in the overall decision to admit a student, which is permissible under previous judicial precedent. She also argued that the Equal Protection Clause does not require that state universities be blind to the history of overt discrimination and that it is preferable that they explicitly include race as a factor in admission decisions rather than attempt to obfuscate its role.The Supreme Court made a surprising decision today. However, if Scalia was on the Court and still Kagan recused herself, the decision would have been split and the outcome would have been the’same.In this case, justice would have prevailed anyway.Featured image via Win McNamee/Getty Images
Your task is to classify the provided input as real or fake news. Label 0 is meant for fake news, Label 1 is for real news. TEXT: Another day, another time the Supreme Court surprises everyone. While the divided court issued a serious blow to immigrants, their families, and the Obama administration, it did decide to save an important protection for minorities  affirmative action.The Court, and a 4 to 3 decision (Kagan did not participate), upheld the University of Texas  practice of considering race a factor in admissions.The’surprise decision was written by Justice Anthony Kennedy, a Reagan appointee, and joined by Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor and Stephen Breyer.Dissenting was Clarence Thomas, John Roberts and Samuel Alito.Kennedy, writing in the Court s opinion, warned that while it may use race as a factor in admissions, it may not be the only determining factor:The Court s affirmance of the universities admissions policy today does not necessarily mean the University may rely on that same policy without refinement. It is the University s ongoing obligation to engage in constant deliberation and continued reflection regarding its admissions policies.The case stemmed from an incident in 2008 when a high school graduate was denied admission to the University of Texas at Austin. The’student, Abigail Fisher, who is white, alleged that she was a victim of racial discrimination. At the time, UT had a program that automatically accepted the top 10 percent of high school graduates, and took in other factors such as scores and extracurricular activities. Fisher, who scored in the top 12 percent, felt she was unfairly denied even though she had 1180 out of 1600 on her SAT, and volunteered for Habitat for Humanity.In other words, she felt entitled. And, whenever a white person is a  victim  of  discrimination,  they want to cry  racism  and throw everyone else under the bus.This decision was the’second time the Supreme Court took up the case. The first time, the Court sent the case back to the lower system for further review. When the’same conclusion was met, the Court agreed to hear it once more. The first time, however, all Justices except for Ginsburg agreed (Kagan, again, recused herself). Ginsburg s dissent chided the Court for ignoring precedence and racial history:Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote a dissenting opinion in which she argued that the University s admission policy treats race as merely one factor in the overall decision to admit a student, which is permissible under previous judicial precedent. She also argued that the Equal Protection Clause does not require that state universities be blind to the history of overt discrimination and that it is preferable that they explicitly include race as a factor in admission decisions rather than attempt to obfuscate its role.The Supreme Court made a surprising decision today. However, if Scalia was on the Court and still Kagan recused herself, the decision would have been split and the outcome would have been the’same.In this case, justice would have prevailed anyway.Featured image via Win McNamee/Getty Images