[Bonaparte]

Thankyou for clarifying all that, aristeides. I did recall that Powell was pivotal. What a mess that decision made! But it looks like the UM case will give the SC a clear shot at finally bringing constitutional clarity to this issue. No matter what they decide, I know very well that various cities, states and universities will violate the mandate in their determination to impose their concept of "social justice" on the rest of us. University of California's defiance of 209 is a case in point. So is Willie Brown's discriminatory contract/hiring policy in SF. So the fight will be probably be endless and a SC decision adverse to UM will only keep the honest people honest.

[aristeides]

Once the law is settled, then any officials who continue to practice the prohibited discrimination can be held personally liable. A case in point is Estepp v. Alexander, 95 F.3d 312 (4th Cir. 1996), where officials of the fire department of Prince George's County, Maryland were found personally liable for reverse discrimination. Hit them in the pocketbook.