![]() ![]() 1369) said that:Ĭitizens, of every race and color. Who has the more persuasive account of the historical context of the Fourteenth Amendment: Justice Thomas, or Justice Sotomayor? First consider their specific disputes about the Freedmen's Bureau, or especially about the Civil Rights Act of 1866, which was central to Section One of the Fourteenth Amendment. For that matter this case is not really about "protection" either. ![]() Is there a strong textual basis for the majority opinion? Is the phrase "equal protection" sufficiently clear to resolve this issue? Not only does the text say nothing about colorblindness or affirmative action, but it says nothing about race at all. Consider the constitutional arguments in these opinions.In particular, here are the notes for Students For Fair Admissions: The supplement is largely intended for users of the casebook, of course, but I thought the notes might be of interest more generally to those who have read and thought about the cases. Elenis and Students for Fair Admissions v. (I shilled for the book earlier on this blog-at the start of the Trump administration-as "A new constitutional law casebook for our unsettled age," and I think that claim has aged even better than I could have imagined.) The supplement covers four cases from last term-National Pork Producers v. Michael Stokes Paulsen, Michael McConnell, Sam Bray, and I recently completed and posted the 2023 online supplement to our constitutional law casebook: The Constitution of the United States. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |