Today in Supreme Court History

Today in Supreme Court History: April 1, 2003

|The Volokh Conspiracy |

4/1/2003: Grutter v. Bollinger and Gratz v. Bollinger argued.

NEXT: Brickbat: Snooping Saudis

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. That description of the case leaves out a very important past wrong, foisted on countless people. See:

    Mr. D.

    1. Je ne regrette rien.

      Mr. D.

  2. And the farcical “Plus factor not quota ” line of jurisprudence was extended

    1. I view it more as Dred Scott Part Deux…

      Once the Supreme Court established that some students are more equal than others, it isn’t hard to see what Orwell predicted actually happening. Once O’Connor gutted the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to address the sins of not the Grandparents but the Great-Grandparents, she destroyed the moral credibility upon which the entire Civil Rights movement rested.

      What she did was license the “woke” hooliganism which plagues academia today — and let us not forget that Affirmative Retribution came about as a reward for what today would be considered felonious behavior, a point made by Thomas Sowell — see

      While I don’t think any of us have any idea what will remain of academia after the Wuhan Virus has passed — much of it (including more than a few law schools) was already on shaky financial footing before this, with about half the country openly despising higher education in general. And I think any objective observer can agree that, like the excesses of the French Revolution, the “woke” tyranny can not continue along its current trajectory indefinitely…

      1. “Once the Supreme Court established that some students are more equal than others”

        How far back can snowflakey privileges for (certain) religious claimants be traced?

        1. I thought that all persons were entitled to religious freedom, even Pastafarians.

          1. Religious freedom does not necessarily invoke endless snowflake status. And superstition-based claims are not superior to reason-based claims, including with respect to matters of conscience.

            Choose reason. Every time.

            Especially over sacred ignorance and dogmatic intolerance. Most especially if you are older than 12 or so, because by then childhood indoctrination falters as an excuse for gullibility, backwardness, bigotry, insularity, and superstition. By adulthood — even ostensible adulthood — it is no excuse, not even in southern or rural areas.

            Choose reason. And education, tolerance, science, modernity, freedom, and inclusiveness. Avoid ignorance, bigotry, childish dogma, backwardness, authoritarianism, and pining for good old days that never existed.

            Choose reason. Every time. Be an adult.

            Or, at least, try.

            Thank you.

    2. What is the status of the suit against Harvard? Last I heard is that the District Court ruled for Harvard and that that Students For Fair Admissions (Edward Blum) had filed an appeal with the First Circuit in a case many (myself included) believed headed to SCOTUS.

      If the appeal is still pending with the First Circuit, that means that any appeal to SCOTUS likely won’t make it there in time for the FY-2021 docket — it would be FY-2022.

      Post this November’s election, and quite likely post RGB as her health is failing and I can’t see her holding out until June of 2025 in hopes of her replacement being named by a Democrat POTUS. So if Trump wins this fall, which he likely will, RGB’s vote will be replaced with a Federalist Society vote.

      O’Connor said that she only wanted to continue Affirmative Retribution “for another generation.” By 2022 it will have been 19 years — which is essentially “another generation”…

      1. ” So if Trump wins this fall, which he likely will, ”

        Just not enough poorly educated bigots and superstitious knuckledraggers left in America to position Pres. Trump for another trick shot through the Electoral College. He needed a three-cushion bank shot the first time, and that was before another four years of improvement — less white, less bigoted, less religious, less rural, etc. — in our electorate.

        1. And what will be your excuse this time when he wins?

          1. If Trump navigates another Electoral College longshot, the reasons are likely to include:

            1) Persistent, vestigial levels of uneducated, stale-thinking, bigoted, superstitious, easily frightened Republicans and conservatives.

            2) Structural amplification of yahoo voices at the Electoral College.

            3) Successful Republican voter suppression programs enabled by elected officials in knuckle-dragging states.

            4) A God who hates America.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.