cause for celebration for the vast majority of th americans who agree with the supreme court, who wrote, racialeliminatinge discrimination means eliminating all of it. it cannot mean one thing when applied to one individual and something else when applied to a person of another color. an abc ipsosething poll revealt 52% of americans agree with the decision to race based admissions. but sadly, this did not go over well with many democrats. new york congressman jamaal bowman said the court is illegitimate and that they re there to serve white supremacy and white patriarchy . the supreme court is here to serve oligarchs. oligar they re here to serve billionaires. they re here to servchey re her. they re here to serve white supremacy and white patriarchyr and nativism. they want to take away our civil rights. they want to take away our voting rights, our human s rights. , huma they want to make our country more dangerous by expanding concealen men s ri wand carry p they don t
jonathan turley is a fox news contributor and a george washington university law professor and he joins us now. and it s great to see you this evening. you heard in that clipneontribu> say we will be looking for new ways to pursue the ill defined goal of diversity. what do you think will bsaell b the response of not just harvard and not just north carolina, but universities atjut large in response to the supreme court s ruling ? well, i think they are goingi tn to attemptk to use race in a different way after the key decision in 77, the supreme court said that it was getting rid of affirmative actiond of admissions, but would allow anod exception for the use of raceor is just one factor. what the universities did is that they they achieved essentially the same result using that diversity rationale. that s why the court continually pushed back. what s actually sort of fascinatin g is that after this decision came down, there was