|
eh, i broswed through Gratz v. Bollinger, not exactly to me the landmark decision every keeps getting wet about.
Most of the opinion is saying the school was wrong in part for what they did and how they set their standards, so there's another issue unsettled with AA. Second, they found that Jennifer and Patrick had standing, which is a big deal to me since this will open the gates for more claims on unfair racial preferences unless the school's can prove the narrowly tailored exception. And I guess looking at it from a constitutional point of view, AA is a violation of equal protections clause and title VI since it does set one class of persons above another.
On the other hand, I think sometimes AA is a necessary evil, so that we can force a balance that just isn't going to happen on its own. But reading through this garbage, I don't see this case as being the final word. Only 6 justices took part in the opinion (Scalia must be alseep again) so I'll keep my eye out for a better ruling in the future.
RUgreek
|