time is now // (Scott Johnson).
The topic of affirmative action is a subject close to my heart. I have written extensively about it, often drawing on Andrew Kull’s legal history The Color-Blind Constitution. Published by Harvard University Press 1998, it is still a great book. Kull could update it to include cases from the past 25 years. This would be a good update. Kull’s admiration of those who have tried to enforce the “color-blind Constitution”, in lawsuits dating back to 1850, and the doublethink that has destroyed it, cannot be overlooked.
It is a subject shrouded by doublethink. Doublethink permeated both the UNC, and Harvard cases of “affirmative actions” argued yesterday at the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court has posted oral argument for the UNC case hier and the Harvard case hier .
Perhaps it is time to put “affirmative actions” in the path of ultimate extinction. It is clear that if the Supreme Court affirms the claims of colorblindness in higher educational, it will face massive resistance from those who have perpetuated racial discrimination. The Star Tribune celebrates their efforts in advance in If the Court finds its way through these cases, however the law will ultimately prevail.
Following the conclusion of yesterday’s oral argument in both cases, the Manhattan Institute hosted a virtual discussion. Ilya Shapiro, MI Senior Fellow and Director of Constitutional Studies, University of San Diego Law School University Professor Gail Heriot and Wai Wah Chin, MI adjunct fellow, were the participants. James R. Copland, a senior fellow at MI and director of legal policies, moderated the discussion. Below is the video.
