[justshe]

Did you conveniently overlook this post The Solicitor General argued in opposition to both the law school and the undergrad admissions policies ?

[TLBSHOW]

are you sure justshe?

[aristeides]

Solicitor General Olson argued that the two policies of the university were unconstitutional because they were not narrowly tailored (and so unconstitutional even if racial diversity is a compelling interest). He did NOT argue (because he had been ordered not to) that racial diversity is not a compelling interest that can justify practising racial discrimination if it is narrowly tailored. If racial diversity is not a compelling interest, then racial discrimination, whether a quota or a preference, is unconstitutional whether it is narrowly tailored or not. The Supreme Court apparently has just ruled that racial diversity IS a compelling interest, that the law school preferences are narrowly tailored, and the undergraduate more blatant preferences are not narrowly tailored.