Replies

“because this is a function they took on themselves”

Compelling State Interest I believe they called it back in ‘78 in Bakke.

It surprised me as a 20 something that the Supreme Court had the idea that they were empowered to conjure up things that were Goals of the Magnificent State.

Seems others were shocked as well. And we’ve been shocked ever since. But haven’t gotten out of it.

Sandy Babee comes from my neck of the woods. Used to work on a ranch a few doors down from the one she grew up on. Big spread, like they all are there....it’s desert, so you need a lotta dirt per cow. But it always surprised me that she has so much animus against the nation that gave her family that dirt: if it was still Mexico, it wouldn’t be hers. And she would not have had the cash to go to Stahn-ford.

But of course in her re-affirmation of anti-Caucasian Discrimination, she crapped on that nation. Personally, I’m waiting for her to cede the land to Los Indigeanos from South of Douglas.

I have a funny feeling that ain’t happening. And if they were to try to make a point of it, she would be the first to call the Caucasian troops to defend her dirt...which of course, she wont, being far too dainty for that.

Funny how she likes to have it both ways. Not sure it’s going to work out like that.

-- Compelling State Interest I believe they called it back in `78 in Bakke. --

Then in 2003 Grutter v. Bollinger.

It has been 25 years since Justice Powell first approved the use of race to further an interest in student body diversity in the context of public higher education. Since that time, the number of minority applicants with high grades and test scores has indeed increased. See Tr. of Oral Arg. 43. We expect that 25 years from now, the use of racial preferences will no longer be necessary to further the interest approved today.
IV
In summary, the Equal Protection Clause does not prohibit the Law School's narrowly tailored use of race in admissions decisions to further a compelling interest in obtaining the educational benefits that flow from a diverse student body. Consequently, petitioner's statutory claims based on Title VI and 42 U.S.C. S: 1981 also fail.

A case based on the diversity fallacy.

Nobody get to that sort of position without being full of themselves and full of personal ambition. Not much humility.