Replies

Didn't you do this earlier.

I have these questions for you....1) Which side of the case did this administration submit a "Friend of the Court" brief in support of? ANSWER THAT

2) The next question I have for you and the entertainer on EIB is..... Who is argueing the case in front of the nine Justices of the SCOTUS?

And 3) Next..... Do you think the nine justices heard the speech Bush gave on this subject?

The answers are:

1) The Students

2) The lawyers for the Students

3)Yes they did, Loud and clear

It is a key point though if 'diversity' as a goal is viewed as consituionally permissible reason to accout for race.
The reason this is a concern is that we know the colleges would just love to play the race-quota game if they can... so it is not just the ruling, but how secure the USSC locks the door on racial preferences. we've seen before (eg in govt contracting) how one ruling is evaded through subtle means. ... we shall see.

OTOH, judicial restraint demands that the court rule no more widley than they have to. ... you may get 3 to abolish all preferences (Thomas, Scalia, Rehnquist), 4 to vote of UM (souter/ginsberg/breyer/stevens) and 2 in the middle to try to have a narrow ruling. maybe the brief is written for the 2 in the middle.

I am not super concerned since I knew from the outset the Supreme Court Will Decide, not the administration. Even a non-sweeping brief is more courage than no brief at all.

Amendment XIV

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Section 2. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several states according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each state, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the executive and judicial officers of a state, or the members of the legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such state, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such state.

Section 3. No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any state, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any state legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any state, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

Section 4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any state shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.

Section 5. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.