Numerous legal scholars thought the five conservative justices on the Roberts Court — not best known for judicial modesty — would end Grutter now.I don't disagree that the Roberts Court is not exactly a beacon of "judicial modesty." But remember when it was? Or more accurately, remember when it was thought that it would be? A lot of folks thought that would be a defining feature of the Roberts Court. Maybe that was always an unreasonable belief; maybe the whole idea of "judicial modesty" is conceptually incoherent. I do find it interesting, though, that the conventional wisdom regarding the Chief Justice and his cohorts has done a complete 180, such that now folks can just casually presume agreement with the statement that they're the furthest thing from "modest."
Friday, May 31, 2013
Immodest Robes
TPM tries to read the tea leaves on the Supreme Court's upcoming affirmative action decision, but I was more struck by this throwaway line:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
It's particularly odd to assume about Roberts less than year after he found a way to deem the Affordable Care Act's individual mandate constitutional while still limiting the Commerce Clause.
Anyway, yeah, Fisher is not set up well procedurally to get far-reaching relief.
Texas's system also creates a peculiarity in which the plaintiff probably would have been in the top 10% of her class, and thus likely to have gotten admission to UT-Austin, if she hadn't been going to such a good public school.
Post a Comment