The issue in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard is whether Harvard could discriminate against Asian Americans and put a quota on how many were admitted as they had with Jews in the 1920’s. More generally, is it legal to discriminate by race, at least in discriminating in favor of blacks? There is a majority opinion, 3 concurrences, and 2 dissents in this 6-3 decision. I have skimmed them and present to you what I think are some good bits. Lots of people have been writing about this. If you want to skip to the most unique (I think the term is actually proper here) part of this Substack, go to the end, where I talk about what comes next in the legal world, with special reference to class-action suits against MIT.
Excellent analysis. A miniscule quibble is that you refer to Thomas' "dissent." It is a concurrence, as you note elsewhere. Your analysis and the concurring opinions are all enjoyable reads.
Excellent analysis. A miniscule quibble is that you refer to Thomas' "dissent." It is a concurrence, as you note elsewhere. Your analysis and the concurring opinions are all enjoyable reads.
Thank you! An embarassing slip. A good thing about Substack is that one's essays can always be corrected, as I have now done.