Supreme Court to Hear Affirmative Action Challenge

On today’s podcast, David and Sarah celebrate 200 episodes with a discussion of two key ...

By and

On today’s podcast, David and Sarah celebrate 200 episodes with a discussion of two key college admissions cases the Supreme Court took up. Plus, they preview Sarah Palin’s defamation trial, and look at a circuit court judge’s unusual opinion.

Show Notes:

Keep reading with a free account
Create a free Dispatch account to keep reading Get Started ALREADY HAVE AN ACCOUNT? SIGN IN
By and
Comments (95)
Join The Dispatch to participate in the comments.
 
  1. Avatar photo
    Nathan

    Perhaps I missed a previous Advisory Opinions pod on this, but now I absolutely want to hear a meaningful discussion about the Dominion — as well as Smartmatic — vs Fox cases… also does Fox really wanna go through a discovery process w this case? Sounds like the exact time period where Fox wouldn’t want people reading and publicly interpreting their mail.

    Collapse
  2. Byron Hing

    One other thing against Asian Americans is that many schools balance the budget by admitting more international students who at many schools don’t qualify for financial aid. So the Asian quota is actually being taken up by foreign students, hurting Asian Americans further. Asian Americans are screwed in college admissions.

    Collapse
  3. Byron Hing

    One other thing against Asian Americans is that many schools balance the budget by admitting more international students who at many schools don’t qualify for financial aid. So the Asian quota is actually being taken up by foreign students, hurting Asian Americans further. Asian Americans are screwed in college admissions.

    Collapse
  4. Avatar photo
    Hawks Law Office

    For me the Van Dyke opinion raises an interesting counter-factual. Suppose the Roe court had done what Justice Ginsburg suggested in her 1992 Madison Lecture, namely strike down the Texas statute as one of the more extreme prohibitions on abortion without imposing the trimester framework. That would have been similar to what the Court actually did in Heller striking down the extreme D.C. gun statute but without detailing a regulatory framework going forward. One can then imagine states like Texas reimposing "undue burdens" on abortions that the 5th Circuit would then consistently uphold (like the 9th Circuit and gun restrictions), until the Supreme Court took up the abortion issue again.

    Collapse
  5. Avatar photo
    Mark

    That was a content-rich pod. Thanks. Justice Bryer's retirement likely means another politicized confirmation process. Take a look at the following article for suggestions to improve the process. Grant Frazier & John Thorpe, A Case for Circumscribed Judicial Evaluation in the Supreme Court Confirmation Process, 33 GEORGETOWN JOURNAL OF LEGAL ETHICS 229 (2020).

    Collapse
  6. Avatar photo
    Jon McKinney

    Can we have a WOP and HOP podcast? Maybe just a one episode spouse of the pod show?

    Collapse
  7. Avatar photo
    Mike Smith

    The projector, what about false advertising?

    Collapse
  8. Avatar photo
    T.K. Small

    Emergency pod needed…!!!

    Collapse
  9. Avatar photo
    Ben Connelly

    Happy Birthday, David!

    I had a very similar taser experience in college, except that it was a touch taser (it didn’t shoot), and I volunteered (curiosity killed the cat).

    Collapse
  10. Sean Parnell

    I'm in agreement with a lot of what was said about the Harvard/UNC cases, BUT - I think you both missed the mark in your seeming dismissal of athletics as a legitimate factor in admissions and their role in college. To quote Bear Bryant, it's kind of hard to rally around a math class. Ditto for things like (to list just a few things one might find at college) Intervarsity Christian Fellowship, a Habitat for Humanity chapter, student government, and Greek organizations. It makes perfect sense for a college to try to build a student body that has enough offensive linemen, chorus club members, likely French majors, etc. You're also ignoring that a prospective student who is recruited for play has, just by the fact of their being recruited, shown themselves (at least in most cases) to be possessed of more than basic athletic prowess. If they're being recruited, they've almost certainly demonstrated the ability to keep commitments, pursue excellence, dedicate ones self to something, and often develop both teamwork and leadership skills. Kids who could be home playing video games are instead spending extra hours practicing and achieving in athletics - that's something worth recognizing. I should note that this applies outside of athletics too - someone who became an Eagle Scout, or who founded a meals-on-wheels in their community, or is a black belt in a martial art, or has risen to become a manager at McDonald's by the time they are a high school senior, have all demonstrated things that set them apart from someone who has great grades, a year in Spanish Club, a season on on the j.v. tennis team, and not much else on their application. There's nothing wrong, IMO, with taking the 3.9/1500 SAT who was an all-state shortstop over the 4.0/1600 SAT who has the high score on Donkey Kong at the local arcade (and there's nothing wrong with taking both, either).

    Collapse
Load More