1. DETROIT — A federal appeals court Friday struck down Proposal 2, the 2006 Michigan referendum that banned affirmative action in college admissions, employment and contracting, setting up another U.S. Supreme Court showdown on the issue. “It’s a tremendous victory,” Detroit attorney George Washington said Friday, shortly after the U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in a 2-1 decision that Proposal 2 was unconstitutional. “Affirmative action is back on the agenda,” Washington said. Washington, who represents members of a coalition of organizations that fought the 2006 ballot proposal, said he expects the state to ask the entire U.S. 6th Circuit to review the decision and, if that fails, ask the U.S. Supreme Court to take up the issue. Michigan ban on race in college admissions is illegal, judges rule » National News » The Joplin Globe, Joplin, MO 2. Tyranny: oppressive power <every form of tyranny over the mind of man — Thomas Jefferson>; especially: oppressive power exerted by government <the tyranny of a police. Tyranny - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary 3. We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America. THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION - We the People 4. "U.S. Constitution was a terribly shocking document, especially to rulers all over the world. Because here were a people who were placing themselves in the role of master and placing government in the role of servant. In other words, in one fell swoop, the American people had inverted the historical relationship between citizen and government." The Constitution: Liberties of the People and Powers of Government, Part 2 5. But, time and again, we allow the group known as ‘judges’ to decide that the people are not capable of deciding what is right and what is wrong. In this particular case, the elected representatives of the people memorialized the injustice of treating some Americans differently from other Americans. This is wrong. A re-evaluation of the role of judges is necessary. And it should be based on the following sentiment, penned by a judge, Chief Justice William Rehnquist: [The decision in item #1 above is] “based upon the proposition that federal judges, perhaps judges as a whole, have a role of their own, quite independent of popular will, to play in solving society’s problems. Once we have abandoned the idea that the authority of the courts to declare laws unconstitutional is somehow tied to the language of the Constitution that the people adopted, a judiciary exercising the power of judicial review appears in a quite different light. a. Judges then are no longer the keepers of the covenant; instead they are a small group of fortunately situated people with a roving commission to second-guess Congress, state legislatures, and state and federal administrative officers concerning what is best for the country. Surely there is no justification for a third legislative branch in the federal government, and there is even less justification for a federal legislative branch’s reviewing on a policy basis the laws enacted by the legislatures of the fifty states.” http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol29_No2_Rehnquist.pdf Judges: get out of the people's business. You apply the Constitution- and no more!