I have two statements from American jurisprudence that appear to espouse diametrically opposite sentiments and lead to conclusions antithetical to one another. They cannot help you decide, one way or another. Then, how does one decide?
'In order to get beyond racism, we must first take account of race' - Justice Henry Blackmun in Regents of the University of California v. Bakke [1]
'The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race' - Majority opinion of the US Supreme Court in Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District [1]
Which way do you lean? Try to explain your position to yourself, making sure you can negate the forceful arguments of the other side, as your side has already been endorsed by legal luminaries at the highest levels.
Raghuram Ekambaram
References
1. Affirmative Action in Higher Education, Diane P. Wood, pp. 161-163, in Equalizing Access, Eds. Zoya Hassan and Martha C. Nussbaum, Oxford University Press, 2012 (ISBN-10: 0-19-807505-7)
'In order to get beyond racism, we must first take account of race' - Justice Henry Blackmun in Regents of the University of California v. Bakke [1]
'The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race' - Majority opinion of the US Supreme Court in Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District [1]
Which way do you lean? Try to explain your position to yourself, making sure you can negate the forceful arguments of the other side, as your side has already been endorsed by legal luminaries at the highest levels.
Raghuram Ekambaram
References
1. Affirmative Action in Higher Education, Diane P. Wood, pp. 161-163, in Equalizing Access, Eds. Zoya Hassan and Martha C. Nussbaum, Oxford University Press, 2012 (ISBN-10: 0-19-807505-7)
No comments:
Post a Comment