schuette
attorney
general
michigan
coalition
defend
affirmative
action
integration
immigration
rights
fight
equality
means
necessary
bamn
et
argued
october
decided
april
decided
university
michigan
undergraduate
admissions
plan
use
preferences
violated
equal
protection
clause
gratz
bollinger
law
school
admission
plan
limited
use
grutter
bollinger
michigan
voters
adopted
proposal
art
state
constitution
relevant
prohibits
use
preferences
part
admissions
process
state
universities
consolidated
challenges
district
granted
summary
judgment
michigan
thus
upholding
proposal
sixth
circuit
reversed
concluding
proposal
violated
principles
washington
seattle
school
dist
held
judgment
reversed
reversed
justice
kennedy
joined
chief
justice
justice
alito
concluded
authority
federal
constitution
precedents
judiciary
set
aside
michigan
laws
commit
voters
determination
whether
racial
preferences
may
considered
governmental
decisions
particular
respect
school
admissions
pp
case
constitutionality
merits
admissions
policies
higher
education
principle
consideration
race
admissions
permissible
certain
conditions
met
challenged
rather
question
concerns
whether
manner
voters
may
choose
prohibit
consideration
racial
preferences
prohibited
admissions
policies
universities
responded
experimenting
wide
variety
alternative
approaches
grutter
supra
decision
michigan
voters
reflects
ongoing
national
dialogue
practices
pp
sixth
circuit
determination
seattle
controlled
extends
seattle
holding
case
presenting
quite
different
issues
reach
mistaken
conclusion
pp
necessary
consider
first
relevant
cases
preceding
seattle
background
seattle
arose
reitman
mulkey
hunter
erickson
involved
demonstrated
injuries
basis
race
reasons
state
encouragement
participation
became
aggravated
mulkey
amendment
california
constitution
prohibiting
state
legislative
interference
owner
prerogative
decline
sell
rent
residential
property
basis
barred
challenging
parties
account
race
invoking
protection
california
statutes
thus
preventing
leasing
residential
property
hunter
voters
overturned
akron
ordinance
enacted
address
widespread
racial
discrimination
housing
sales
rentals
forced
many
live
unsafe
unsanitary
segregated
housing
seattle
school
board
adopted
mandatory
busing
program
alleviate
racial
isolation
minority
students
local
schools
voters
passed
state
initiative
barred
busing
desegregate
found
state
initiative
practical
effect
removing
authority
address
racial
problem
existing
decisionmaking
body
way
burden
minority
interests
busing
advocates
must
seek
relief
state
legislature
statewide
electorate
pp
seattle
best
understood
case
state
action
serious
risk
purpose
causing
specific
injuries
account
race
case
mulkey
hunter
judicial
finding
de
jure
segregation
respect
seattle
school
district
finding
required
today
see
parents
involved
community
schools
seattle
school
dist
seattle
must
understood
seattle
understood
case
neither
state
challenge
propriety
student
assignments
purpose
achieving
integration
even
absent
finding
prior
de
jure
segregation
seattle
broad
language
however
went
well
beyond
analysis
needed
resolve
case
seizing
upon
statement
justice
harlan
concurrence
hunter
procedural
change
case
clear
purpose
making
difficult
certain
racial
religious
minorities
achieve
legislation
interest
seattle
established
new
rationale
government
policy
inures
primarily
benefit
minority
minorities
consider
policy
interest
state
action
place
effective
decisionmaking
authority
policy
different
level
government
subject
strict
scrutiny
pp
extent
seattle
read
require
determine
declare
political
policies
serve
interest
group
defined
racial
terms
rationale
unnecessary
decision
seattle
support
precedent
raises
serious
equal
protection
concerns
cautioning
impermissible
racial
stereotypes
rejected
assumption
individuals
race
think
alike
see
shaw
reno
proposition
necessary
beginning
point
seattle
formulation
control
deemed
necessary
probe
races
define
interest
political
matters
still
another
beginning
point
define
individuals
according
race
venture
undertaken
clear
legal
standards
accepted
sources
guide
judicial
decision
also
result
impose
high
risk
inquiries
categories
dependent
upon
demeaning
stereotypes
classifications
questionable
constitutionality
terms
assuming
steps
taken
next
required
determine
policy
realms
groups
defined
race
political
interest
undertaking
without
guidance
accepted
legal
standards
risk
creation
incentives
support
oppose
certain
policies
cast
debate
terms
racial
advantage
disadvantage
adoption
seattle
formulation
affect
number
laws
decisions
involving
tax
policy
housing
subsidies
racial
division
validated
discouraged
argued
objections
larger
consequences
seattle
formulation
need
confronted
race
undoubted
subject
ballot
issue
problems
raised
seattle
racial
definitions
still
apply
principal
flaw
sixth
circuit
decision
remains
infliction
specific
injury
kind
issue
mulkey
hunter
history
seattle
schools
precedent
extending
cases
restrict
right
michigan
voters
determine
preferences
granted
state
entities
ended
sixth
circuit
judgment
also
calls
question
rulings
policies
similar
michigan
unlike
injuries
mulkey
hunter
seattle
question
address
prevent
injury
caused
account
race
whether
voters
may
determine
whether
policy
preferences
continued
approving
proposal
thereby
adding
state
constitution
michigan
voters
exercised
privilege
enact
laws
basic
exercise
democratic
power
bypassing
public
officials
deemed
responsive
concerns
policy
granting
preferences
mandate
segregated
schools
brown
board
education
scores
examples
teach
individual
liberty
constitutional
protection
nation
constitutional
system
also
embraces
right
citizens
speak
debate
learn
matter
political
act
lawful
electoral
process
michigan
voters
done
precepts
inconsistent
principle
hurt
injury
inflicted
racial
minorities
encouragement
command
laws
state
action
constitution
requires
redress
courts
circumstances
present
mulkey
hunter
seattle
present
pp
justice
scalia
joined
justice
thomas
agreed
rightly
stands
though
passes
muster
doctrine
likely
cases
establishing
doctrine
overruled
patently
atextual
unadministrable
contrary
traditional
equal
protection
jurisprudence
question
every
case
neutral
state
action
said
deny
equal
protection
account
race
whether
challenged
action
reflects
racially
discriminatory
purpose
plainly
pp
appeals
sixth
circuit
held
unconstitutional
doctrine
derived
washington
seattle
school
dist
hunter
erickson
cases
one
level
government
exercised
borrowed
authority
apparently
racial
issue
higher
level
government
called
loan
deemed
revocation
violation
without
regard
whether
evidence
invidious
purpose
discriminate
relentless
radical
logic
hunter
seattle
point
similar
conclusion
many
cases
pp
problems
doctrine
begin
triggering
prong
assigns
task
determining
whether
law
reallocates
policymaking
authority
concerns
racial
issue
seattle
whether
adopting
one
position
question
bottom
inur
primarily
benefit
minority
designed
purpose
freeform
judicial
musing
ethnic
racial
interests
involves
judges
dirty
business
dividing
nation
racial
blocs
metro
broadcasting
fcc
dissenting
promotes
racial
stereotyping
see
shaw
reno
fundamentally
analysis
misreads
equal
protection
clause
protect
particular
groups
construction
repudiated
long
line
cases
understanding
equal
protection
personal
right
adarand
constructors
peña
pp
second
part
analysis
directs
determine
whether
challenged
act
place
effective
decisionmaking
authority
racial
issue
different
level
government
seattle
supra
another
line
cases
emphasized
sovereignty
state
design
governing
structure
sees
fit
see
holt
civic
club
tuscaloosa
taken
limits
logic
gaping
exception
nearly
swallows
rule
structural
state
sovereignty
seem
permit
state
give
certain
powers
cities
later
assign
powers
counties
even
reclaim
pp
hunter
seattle
also
endorse
version
proposition
facially
neutral
law
may
deny
equal
protection
solely
disparate
racial
impact
theory
squarely
soundly
rejected
unwavering
line
cases
holding
violation
equal
protection
clause
requires
state
action
motivated
discriminatory
intent
hernandez
new
york
concurring
judgment
official
action
held
unconstitutional
solely
results
racially
disproportionate
impact
arlington
heights
metropolitan
housing
development
respondents
prove
action
reflects
racially
discriminatory
purpose
law
expressly
requiring
state
actors
afford
persons
equal
protection
laws
deny
person
equal
protection
laws
amdt
pp
justice
breyer
agreed
amendment
consistent
equal
protection
clause
different
reasons
first
case
addresses
amendment
applies
forbids
admissions
programs
consider
race
solely
order
obtain
educational
benefits
diverse
student
body
second
constitution
permits
require
use
kind
programs
barred
michigan
constitution
foresees
ballot
box
courts
normal
instrument
resolving
debates
merits
programs
third
hunter
erickson
washington
seattle
school
dist
reflect
important
principle
individual
ability
participate
meaningfully
political
process
independent
race
apply
cases
involved
restructuring
political
process
changed
political
level
policies
enacted
case
involves
amendment
took
decisionmaking
authority
away
unelected
actors
placed
hands
voters
hence
case
involve
diminution
minority
ability
participate
political
process
extending
holding
hunter
seattle
situations
decisionmaking
authority
moved
administrative
body
political
one
also
create
significant
difficulties
given
nature
administrative
process
furthermore
principle
underlying
hunter
seattle
runs
competing
principle
favoring
decisionmaking
democratic
process
pp
kennedy
announced
judgment
delivered
opinion
roberts
alito
joined
roberts
filed
concurring
opinion
scalia
filed
opinion
concurring
judgment
thomas
joined
breyer
filed
opinion
concurring
judgment
sotomayor
filed
dissenting
opinion
ginsburg
joined
kagan
took
part
consideration
decision
case
opinion
kennedy
notice
opinion
subject
formal
revision
publication
preliminary
print
reports
readers
requested
notify
reporter
decisions
washington
typographical
formal
errors
order
corrections
may
made
preliminary
print
goes
press
bill
schuette
attorney
general
gan
petitioner
coalition
defend
firmative
action
integration
grant
rights
fight
equality
means
necessary
bamn
et
al
writ
certiorari
appeals
sixth
circuit
april
justice
kennedy
announced
judgment
delivered
opinion
chief
justice
justice
alito
join
case
must
determine
whether
amendment
constitution
state
michigan
approved
enacted
voters
invalid
equal
protection
clause
fourteenth
amendment
constitution
reviewed
constitutionality
two
admissions
systems
university
michigan
one
undergraduate
class
one
law
school
undergraduate
admissions
plan
addressed
gratz
bollinger
law
school
admission
plan
addressed
grutter
bollinger
admissions
process
permitted
explicit
consideration
applicant
race
gratz
invalidated
undergraduate
plan
violation
equal
protection
clause
grutter
found
constitutional
flaw
law
school
admission
plan
limited
use
preferences
response
decision
gratz
university
revised
undergraduate
admissions
process
revision
still
allowed
limited
use
preferences
statewide
debate
question
racial
preferences
context
governmental
decisionmaking
voters
adopted
amendment
state
constitution
prohibiting
state
governmental
entities
michigan
granting
certain
preferences
including
preferences
wide
range
actions
decisions
terms
amendment
preferences
part
admissions
process
state
universities
particular
prohibition
central
instant
case
ballot
proposal
called
proposal
passed
margin
percent
percent
resulting
enactment
became
article
michigan
constitution
noted
amendment
broad
terms
section
relevant
part
follows
university
michigan
michigan
state
university
wayne
state
university
public
college
university
community
college
school
district
shall
discriminate
grant
preferential
treatment
individual
group
basis
race
sex
color
ethnicity
national
origin
operation
public
employment
public
education
public
contracting
state
shall
discriminate
grant
preferential
treatment
individual
group
basis
race
sex
color
ethnicity
national
origin
operation
public
employment
public
education
public
contracting
purposes
section
includes
necessarily
limited
state
city
county
public
college
university
community
college
school
district
political
subdivision
governmental
instrumentality
within
state
michigan
included
section
challenged
two
cases
among
plaintiffs
suits
coalition
defend
affirmative
action
integration
immigrant
rights
fight
equality
means
necessary
bamn
students
faculty
prospective
applicants
michigan
public
universities
named
defendants
included
jennifer
granholm
board
regents
university
michigan
board
trustees
michigan
state
university
board
governors
wayne
state
university
michigan
attorney
general
granted
leave
intervene
defendant
district
eastern
district
michigan
consolidated
cases
district
granted
summary
judgment
michigan
thus
upholding
proposal
bamn
regents
univ
supp
district
denied
motion
reconsider
grant
summary
judgment
supp
panel
appeals
sixth
circuit
reversed
grant
summary
judgment
judge
gibbons
dissented
holding
panel
majority
held
proposal
violated
principles
elaborated
washington
seattle
school
dist
cases
seattle
relied
upon
appeals
sitting
en
banc
agreed
panel
decision
majority
opinion
determined
seattle
mirrors
case
us
seven
judges
dissented
number
opinions
granted
certiorari
addresses
question
presented
important
note
case
constitutionality
merits
admissions
policies
higher
education
consideration
race
admissions
presents
complex
questions
part
addressed
last
term
fisher
university
texas
austin
fisher
disturb
principle
consideration
race
admissions
permissible
provided
certain
conditions
met
case
fisher
principle
challenged
question
concerns
permissibility
admissions
policies
constitution
whether
manner
voters
may
choose
prohibit
consideration
racial
preferences
governmental
decisions
particular
respect
school
admissions
noted
decided
prohibit
admissions
policies
grutter
noted
universities
california
florida
washington
state
racial
preferences
admissions
prohibited
state
law
currently
engaged
experimenting
wide
variety
alternative
approaches
universities
draw
promising
aspects
alternatives
develop
citing
lopez
kennedy
concurring
may
perform
role
laboratories
experimentation
devise
various
solutions
best
solution
far
clear
way
grutter
acknowledged
significance
dialogue
regarding
contested
complex
policy
question
among
within
recognition
federal
structure
permits
innovation
enables
greater
citizen
involvement
democratic
processes
bond
slip
quoting
gregory
ashcroft
case
arises
michigan
decision
state
voters
reflects
part
national
dialogue
regarding
wisdom
practicality
admissions
policies
higher
education
see
coalition
economic
equity
wilson
michigan
state
constitution
invests
independent
boards
trustees
plenary
authority
public
universities
including
admissions
policies
mich
art
viii
see
also
federated
publications
board
trustees
state
although
members
boards
elected
evidence
record
suggests
delegated
authority
admissions
policy
faculty
whether
boards
faculty
set
specific
policy
michigan
public
universities
consider
race
factor
admissions
decisions
holding
invalid
context
student
admissions
state
universities
appeals
relied
primary
part
seattle
supra
deemed
control
case
determination
extends
seattle
holding
case
presenting
quite
different
issues
reach
conclusion
mistaken
explaining
necessary
consider
relevant
cases
preceded
seattle
background
seattle
arose
though
prominent
arguments
parties
decision
reitman
mulkey
proper
beginning
point
discussing
controlling
decisions
mulkey
voters
amended
california
constitution
prohibit
state
legislative
interference
owner
prerogative
decline
sell
rent
residential
property
basis
two
different
cases
gave
rise
mulkey
one
couple
rent
apartment
couple
evicted
apartment
adverse
actions
account
race
cases
complaining
parties
barred
account
race
invoking
protection
california
statutes
result
unable
lease
residential
property
concluded
state
constitutional
provision
denial
equal
protection
agreed
california
amendment
operated
insinuate
state
decision
discriminate
encouraging
practice
noted
immediate
design
intent
amendment
establis
purported
constitutional
right
privately
discriminate
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
emphasis
deleted
agreed
amendment
expressly
authorized
constitutionalized
private
right
discriminate
effect
state
constitutional
amendment
significantly
encourage
involve
state
private
racial
discriminations
dissent
joined
three
justices
justice
harlan
disagreed
majority
holding
dissent
reasoned
california
action
voters
simply
wanted
state
remain
neutral
area
state
party
discrimination
dissenting
voice
prevail
majority
conclusion
state
action
question
encouraged
discrimination
causing
real
specific
injury
next
precedent
relevance
hunter
erickson
central
arguments
respondents
make
instant
case
hunter
first
time
elaborated
appeals
styled
political
process
doctrine
akron
city
council
found
citizens
akron
consisted
different
race
many
live
circumscribed
segregated
areas
unhealthful
unsafe
unsanitary
overcrowded
conditions
discrimination
sale
lease
rental
financing
housing
address
problem
akron
enacted
fair
housing
ordinance
prohibit
sort
discrimination
response
voters
amended
city
charter
overturn
ordinance
require
additional
antidiscrimination
housing
ordinance
approved
referendum
ordinances
regulating
real
property
market
subject
threshold
requirements
plaintiff
black
woman
akron
ohio
alleged
real
estate
agent
show
certain
residences
owners
specified
sell
black
persons
central
reasoning
hunter
charter
amendment
enacted
circumstances
widespread
racial
discrimination
sale
rental
housing
led
segregated
housing
forcing
many
live
unsafe
unsanitary
overcrowded
conditions
stated
background
referendum
required
charter
amendment
must
assessed
ibid
akron
attempted
characterize
charter
amendment
simply
public
decision
move
slowly
delicate
area
race
relations
means
allow
people
akron
participate
decision
rejected
akron
flawed
justifications
discrimination
justifications
terms
effect
acknowledging
targeted
nature
charter
amendment
ibid
noted
furthermore
charter
amendment
unnecessary
general
means
public
control
city
council
people
akron
already
empowered
overturn
ordinances
referendum
found
city
charter
amendment
singling
antidiscrimination
ordinances
places
special
burden
racial
minorities
within
governmental
process
thus
becoming
impermissible
government
action
taken
invidious
intent
injure
racial
minority
justice
harlan
filed
concurrence
argued
city
charter
amendment
clear
purpose
making
difficult
certain
racial
religious
minorities
achieve
legislation
interest
without
regard
sentence
quoted
hunter
rests
unremarkable
principle
state
may
alter
procedures
government
target
racial
minorities
facts
hunter
established
invidious
discrimination
necessary
result
procedural
restructuring
thus
mulkey
hunter
demonstrated
injury
basis
race
reasons
state
encouragement
participation
became
aggravated
seattle
third
case
principal
relevance
school
board
adopted
mandatory
busing
program
alleviate
racial
isolation
minority
students
local
schools
voters
opposed
school
board
busing
plan
passed
state
initiative
barred
busing
desegregate
first
determined
although
white
well
negro
children
benefit
diversity
school
board
plan
inures
primarily
benefit
minority
next
found
practical
effect
state
initiative
remov
authority
address
racial
problem
racial
problem
existing
decisionmaking
body
way
burden
minority
interests
advocates
busing
must
seek
relief
state
legislature
statewide
electorate
therefore
found
initiative
explicitly
us
ed
racial
nature
decision
determine
decisionmaking
process
emphasis
deleted
seattle
best
understood
case
state
action
question
bar
busing
enacted
state
voters
serious
risk
purpose
causing
specific
injuries
account
race
case
mulkey
hunter
although
judicial
finding
de
jure
segregation
respect
seattle
school
district
appears
though
school
segregation
district
may
partial
result
school
board
policies
permitted
white
students
transfer
black
schools
restricting
transfer
black
students
white
schools
parents
involved
community
schools
seattle
school
dist
breyer
dissenting
national
association
advancement
colored
people
naacp
filed
complaint
office
civil
rights
federal
agency
naacp
alleged
school
board
maintained
system
de
jure
segregation
specifically
complaint
alleged
seattle
school
board
created
perpetuated
unlawful
racial
segregation
certain
criteria
construction
program
needlessly
built
new
schools
white
areas
district
criteria
maintenance
inferior
facilities
black
schools
use
explicit
racial
criteria
assignment
teachers
staff
general
pattern
delay
respect
implementation
promised
desegregation
efforts
part
settlement
office
civil
rights
school
board
implemented
seattle
plan
used
busing
mandatory
reassignments
elementary
schools
reduce
racial
imbalance
subject
state
initiative
issue
seattle
see
held
parents
involved
school
board
purported
remedial
action
permissible
today
absent
showing
de
jure
segregation
holding
prompted
justice
breyer
observe
dissent
noted
one
permissible
reading
record
school
board
maintained
policies
perpetuate
racial
segregation
schools
events
must
understand
seattle
seattle
understood
case
neither
state
challenge
propriety
student
assignments
purpose
achieving
integration
even
absent
finding
prior
de
jure
segregation
words
legitimacy
constitutionality
remedy
question
busing
desegregation
assumed
seattle
must
understood
basis
ibid
seattle
involved
state
initiative
carefully
tailored
interfere
desegregative
busing
seattle
accepting
validity
school
board
busing
remedy
predicate
analysis
constitutional
question
found
state
disapproval
school
board
busing
remedy
aggravation
racial
injury
state
complicit
broad
language
used
seattle
however
went
well
beyond
analysis
needed
resolve
case
seized
upon
statement
justice
harlan
concurrence
hunter
procedural
change
case
clear
purpose
making
difficult
certain
racial
religious
minorities
achieve
legislation
interest
language
taken
context
facts
hunter
best
read
simply
describe
necessity
finding
equal
protection
violation
specific
injuries
hostile
discrimination
issue
seattle
however
used
language
hunter
concurrence
establish
new
rationale
seattle
stated
government
policy
inures
primarily
benefit
minority
minorities
consider
policy
interest
state
action
place
effective
decisionmaking
authority
policy
different
level
government
must
reviewed
strict
scrutiny
essence
according
broad
reading
seattle
state
action
racial
focus
makes
difficult
certain
racial
minorities
groups
achieve
legislation
interest
subject
strict
scrutiny
reading
seattle
appeals
found
controlling
reading
must
rejected
broad
rationale
appeals
adopted
goes
beyond
necessary
holding
meaning
precedents
said
support
instant
case
neither
formulation
general
rule
set
forth
precedents
cited
authenticate
suffice
invalidate
proposal
expansive
reading
seattle
principled
limitation
raises
serious
questions
compatibility
settled
equal
protection
jurisprudence
extent
seattle
read
require
determine
declare
political
policies
serve
interest
group
defined
racial
terms
rationale
unnecessary
decision
seattle
support
precedent
raises
serious
constitutional
concerns
expansive
language
provide
proper
guide
decisions
deemed
authoritative
controlling
rule
appeals
elaborated
respondents
seek
establish
contradict
central
equal
protection
principles
cautioning
impermissible
racial
stereotypes
rejected
assumption
members
racial
group
regardless
age
education
economic
status
community
live
think
alike
share
political
interests
prefer
candidates
polls
shaw
reno
see
also
metro
broadcasting
fcc
kennedy
dissenting
rejecting
demeaning
notion
members
defined
racial
groups
ascribe
certain
views
must
different
citizens
entertained
serious
proposition
individuals
race
think
alike
yet
proposition
necessary
beginning
point
seattle
formulation
control
appeals
held
case
deemed
necessary
probe
races
define
interest
political
matters
still
another
beginning
point
define
individuals
according
race
society
lines
becoming
blurred
attempt
define
categories
also
raises
serious
questions
government
action
classifies
individuals
basis
race
inherently
suspect
carries
danger
perpetuating
racial
divisions
polity
seeks
transcend
cf
ho
san
francisco
unified
school
school
district
delineating
racial
categories
purposes
racial
balancing
courts
embark
upon
venture
undertaken
clear
legal
standards
accepted
sources
guide
judicial
decision
also
result
least
impose
high
risk
inquiries
categories
dependent
upon
demeaning
stereotypes
classifications
questionable
constitutionality
terms
even
assuming
initial
steps
taken
manner
consistent
sound
analytic
judicial
framework
next
required
determine
policy
realms
certain
groups
groups
defined
race
political
interest
undertaking
without
guidance
accepted
legal
standards
risk
turn
creation
incentives
support
oppose
certain
policies
cast
debate
terms
racial
advantage
disadvantage
thus
racial
antagonisms
conflict
tend
arise
context
judicial
decisions
courts
undertook
announce
particular
issues
public
policy
classified
advantageous
group
defined
race
risk
inherent
adopting
seattle
formulation
apparent
limiting
standards
defining
public
policies
included
seattle
called
policies
inur
primarily
benefit
minority
minorities
consider
interest
seek
represent
interests
particular
racial
groups
attempt
advance
aims
demanding
equal
protection
ruling
number
matters
foreclosed
voter
review
participation
nation
governmental
policies
wide
ranging
seek
limit
voter
participation
might
tempted
adopt
seattle
formulation
urge
group
choose
define
race
racial
stereotypes
advantaged
disadvantaged
number
laws
decisions
tax
policy
housing
subsidies
wage
regulations
even
naming
public
schools
highways
monuments
examples
become
list
subjects
organizations
insist
beyond
power
voters
decide
beyond
power
legislature
decide
enacting
limits
power
local
authorities
governmental
entities
address
certain
subjects
racial
division
validated
discouraged
seattle
formulation
reasoning
appeals
case
remain
force
perhaps
enacting
policies
exercise
democratic
voters
determine
preferences
adopted
constitutional
validity
choices
regarding
racial
preferences
issue
holding
instant
case
simply
courts
may
disempower
voters
choosing
path
follow
realm
policy
discussions
regular
debate
context
rancor
discord
based
race
avoided
invited
factors
interjected
surely
invitation
insistence
courts
one
response
concerns
may
objections
larger
consequences
seattle
formulation
need
confronted
case
race
undoubted
subject
ballot
issue
number
problems
raised
seattle
racial
definitions
still
apply
principal
flaw
ruling
appeals
remain
infliction
specific
injury
kind
issue
mulkey
hunter
history
seattle
schools
precedent
extending
cases
restrict
right
michigan
voters
determine
preferences
granted
michigan
governmental
entities
ended
also
noted
judgment
appeals
case
necessity
calls
question
rulings
similar
state
policies
california
held
california
constitutional
amendment
prohibiting
racial
preferences
public
contracting
violate
rule
set
seattle
coral
city
county
san
francisco
cal
appeals
ninth
circuit
held
amendment
also
barred
racial
preferences
public
education
violate
equal
protection
clause
wilson
affirm
essential
rationale
appeals
instant
case
holdings
invalidated
least
put
serious
question
affirming
judgment
essence
announce
finding
past
years
state
public
debate
issue
improper
argument
made
coral
might
still
stand
involved
racial
preferences
public
contracting
case
concerns
racial
preferences
university
admissions
implication
constitutionality
laws
forbidding
racial
preferences
depends
policy
interest
stake
concern
already
explained
voters
deem
wise
avoid
divisive
potential
instant
case
presents
question
involved
coral
wilson
involved
mulkey
hunter
seattle
question
address
prevent
injury
caused
account
race
whether
voters
may
determine
whether
policy
preferences
continued
approving
proposal
thereby
adding
state
constitution
michigan
voters
exercised
privilege
enact
laws
basic
exercise
democratic
power
federal
system
respond
enactment
positive
law
initiative
seek
voice
shaping
destiny
times
bond
slip
michigan
voters
used
initiative
system
bypass
public
officials
deemed
responsive
concerns
majority
voters
respect
policy
granting
preferences
raises
difficult
delicate
issues
freedom
secured
constitution
consists
one
essential
dimensions
right
individual
injured
unlawful
exercise
governmental
power
mandate
segregated
schools
brown
board
education
wrongful
invasion
home
silverman
punishing
protester
whose
views
offend
others
texas
johnson
scores
examples
teach
individual
liberty
constitutional
protection
liberty
full
extent
meaning
may
remain
yet
discovered
affirmed
yet
freedom
stop
individual
rights
constitutional
system
embraces
right
citizens
debate
learn
decide
political
process
act
concert
try
shape
course
times
course
nation
must
strive
always
make
freedom
ever
greater
secure
michigan
voters
acted
concert
statewide
seek
consensus
adopt
policy
difficult
subject
historical
background
race
america
source
tragedy
persisting
injustice
history
demands
continue
learn
listen
remain
open
new
approaches
aspire
always
constitutional
order
persons
treated
fairness
equal
dignity
rule
question
addressed
michigan
voters
sensitive
complex
within
grasp
electorate
policies
issue
remain
delicate
resolved
save
university
officials
faculties
acting
remove
immediate
public
scrutiny
control
matters
arcane
electorate
power
must
limited
people
prudently
exercise
power
even
full
debate
holding
unprecedented
restriction
exercise
fundamental
right
held
one
person
common
right
speak
debate
learn
matter
political
act
lawful
electoral
process
respondents
case
insist
difficult
question
public
policy
must
taken
reach
voters
thus
removed
realm
public
discussion
dialogue
debate
election
campaign
quite
addition
serious
first
amendment
implications
position
respect
particular
election
inconsistent
underlying
premises
responsible
functioning
democracy
one
premises
democracy
capacity
duty
learn
past
mistakes
discover
confront
persisting
biases
respectful
rationale
deliberation
rise
flaws
injustices
process
impeded
advanced
decrees
based
proposition
public
requisite
repose
discuss
certain
issues
demeaning
democratic
process
presume
voters
capable
deciding
issue
sensitivity
decent
rational
grounds
process
public
discourse
political
debate
foreclosed
even
risk
public
campaign
sides
seek
use
racial
division
discord
political
advantage
informed
public
must
rise
idea
democracy
must
mature
freedom
embraces
right
indeed
duty
engage
rational
civic
discourse
order
determine
best
form
consensus
shape
destiny
nation
people
first
amendment
dynamics
disserved
say
question
issue
beyond
capacity
voters
debate
determine
precepts
inconsistent
principle
hurt
injury
inflicted
racial
minorities
encouragement
command
laws
state
action
constitution
requires
redress
courts
cf
johnson
california
earching
judicial
review
necessary
guard
invidious
discrimination
edmonson
leesville
concrete
racial
discrimination
invidious
contexts
already
noted
circumstances
found
present
mulkey
hunter
seattle
circumstances
present
reasons
already
discussed
mulkey
hunter
seattle
precedents
stand
conclusion
michigan
voters
must
disempowered
acting
cases
ones
political
restriction
question
designed
used
likely
used
encourage
infliction
injury
reason
race
stake
whether
injury
inflicted
whether
government
instructed
follow
course
entails
first
definition
racial
categories
second
grant
favored
status
persons
racial
categories
others
electorate
instruction
governmental
entities
embark
upon
course
preferences
adopted
must
assume
voters
deemed
preference
system
unwise
account
voters
may
deem
latent
potential
become
source
resentments
hostilities
based
race
nation
seeks
put
behind
whether
adverse
results
follow
subject
debate
voters
might
likewise
consider
debate
reflection
programs
designed
increase
diversity
consistent
constitution
necessary
part
progress
transcend
stigma
past
racism
case
debate
racial
preferences
resolved
may
resolve
authority
constitution
precedents
judiciary
set
aside
michigan
laws
commit
policy
determination
voters
see
sailors
board
ed
county
kent
save
unless
state
county
municipal
government
runs
afoul
federally
protected
right
vast
leeway
management
internal
affairs
deliberative
debate
sensitive
issues
racial
preferences
often
may
shade
rancor
justify
removing
certain
issues
voters
reach
democracy
presume
subjects
either
divisive
profound
public
debate
judgment
appeals
sixth
circuit
reversed
ordered
justice
kagan
took
part
consideration
decision
case
roberts
concurring
bill
schuette
attorney
general
michigan
petitioner
coalition
defend
affirmative
action
integration
immigrant
rights
fight
equality
means
necessary
bamn
et
al
writ
certiorari
appeals
sixth
circuit
april
chief
justice
roberts
concurring
dissent
devotes
pages
expounding
policy
preferences
favor
taking
race
account
college
admissions
nonetheless
concluding
es
mean
suggest
virtues
adopting
admissions
policies
inform
legal
question
post
opinion
sotomayor
dissent
concedes
governing
boards
state
various
universities
implemented
policy
making
illegal
discriminate
grant
preferential
treatment
basis
race
see
post
dissent
view
governing
boards
conclude
drawing
racial
distinctions
university
admissions
undesirable
counterproductive
permissibly
exercising
policymaking
authority
others
might
reach
conclusion
failing
take
race
seriously
dissent
way
stop
discrimination
basis
race
speak
openly
candidly
subject
race
post
urges
ace
matters
slights
snickers
silent
judgments
reinforce
crippling
thoughts
belong
ibid
touch
reality
conclude
racial
preferences
may
debilitating
effect
reinforcing
precisely
doubt
preferences
harm
good
post
disagree
dissent
views
costs
benefits
racial
preferences
wish
away
rather
confront
racial
inequality
post
people
disagree
good
faith
issue
similarly
harm
good
question
openness
candor
either
side
debate
scalia
concurring
judgment
bill
schuette
attorney
general
michigan
petitioner
coalition
defend
affirmative
action
integration
immigrant
rights
fight
equality
means
necessary
bamn
et
al
writ
certiorari
appeals
sixth
circuit
april
justice
scalia
justice
thomas
joins
concurring
judgment
come
called
upon
explore
jurisprudential
twilight
zone
two
errant
lines
precedent
confront
frighteningly
bizarre
question
equal
protection
clause
fourteenth
amendment
forbid
text
plainly
requires
needless
say
except
case
obliges
us
say
question
answers
constitution
proscribes
government
discrimination
basis
race
education
exception
grutter
bollinger
scalia
concurring
part
dissenting
part
precisely
understanding
correct
understanding
federal
equal
protection
clause
people
state
michigan
adopted
fundamental
law
adopting
simultaneously
offend
even
taking
sorry
line
cases
given
find
question
presented
slightly
less
strange
equal
protection
clause
forbid
state
banning
practice
clause
barely
provisionally
permits
reacting
decisions
whether
deterred
prospect
costly
litigation
aware
grutter
bell
may
soon
toll
see
simply
opposed
principle
notion
benign
racial
discrimination
gotten
business
altogether
express
encouragement
universities
california
florida
washington
state
racial
preferences
admissions
prohibited
state
law
currently
engaging
experimenting
wide
variety
alternative
approaches
universities
draw
promising
aspects
alternatives
develop
emphasis
added
respondents
seem
think
admonition
merely
experiment
maintain
never
rightly
began
neither
people
legislatures
ever
option
directing
subordinate
officials
cease
considering
race
applicants
since
deny
members
minority
groups
option
enacting
policy
designed
interest
thus
denying
equal
protection
laws
never
mind
hotly
disputed
whether
practice
admissions
ever
racial
minority
interest
cf
thomas
concurring
part
dissenting
part
never
mind
public
university
stake
defense
policy
ground
designed
benefit
primarily
minorities
opposed
students
regardless
color
enhancing
diversity
hold
policy
unconstitutional
see
battleground
case
constitutionality
admissions
least
quite
rather
doctrine
derived
opinions
washington
seattle
school
dist
hunter
erickson
agree
parts
plurality
opinion
repudiate
doctrine
agree
reinterpretation
seattle
hunter
makes
stand
part
cloudy
doctrinally
anomalous
proposition
whenever
state
action
poses
serious
risk
causing
specific
injuries
account
race
denies
equal
protection
ante
instead
reaffirm
ordinary
principles
law
democratic
heritage
require
plaintiffs
alleging
equal
protection
violations
stemming
facially
neutral
acts
prove
intent
causation
merely
existence
racial
disparity
freeman
pitts
scalia
concurring
citing
washington
davis
hold
law
directing
state
actors
provide
equal
protection
say
least
facially
neutral
violate
constitution
section
michigan
constitution
formerly
proposal
rightly
stands
doctrine
roots
two
cases
first
hunter
akron
city
council
passed
ordinance
ing
equal
opportunity
persons
live
decent
housing
facilities
regardless
race
color
religion
ancestry
national
origin
soon
city
voters
passed
amendment
akron
city
charter
stating
ordinance
enacted
council
commercial
transactions
real
property
basis
race
color
religion
national
origin
including
already
enacted
ordinance
must
first
approved
majority
electors
voting
question
later
referendum
question
whether
charter
amendment
denied
equal
protection
answering
yes
explained
although
law
face
treats
negro
white
jew
gentile
identical
manner
reality
law
impact
falls
minority
majority
needs
protection
discrimination
placing
special
burden
racial
minorities
within
governmental
processes
amendment
disadvantage
racial
minority
making
difficult
enact
legislation
behalf
reasoning
seattle
piece
resolving
eliminate
racial
imbalance
seattle
public
schools
city
school
board
passed
mandatory
busing
plan
sort
typically
imposed
districts
guilty
de
jure
segregation
year
later
citizens
state
washington
passed
initiative
directed
exceptions
school
shall
directly
indirectly
require
student
attend
school
school
geographically
nearest
next
nearest
student
place
residence
offers
course
study
pursued
student
permitting
busing
lower
courts
held
initiative
unconstitutional
affirmed
announcing
prelude
analysis
though
beyond
debate
equal
protection
clause
forbade
laws
subtly
distor
governmental
processes
way
place
special
burdens
ability
minority
groups
achieve
beneficial
legislation
first
question
seattle
whether
subject
matter
initiative
issue
triggering
hunter
process
doctrine
undoubtedly
true
whites
blacks
counted
among
supporters
opponents
initiative
equally
clear
white
black
children
benefitted
desegregated
schools
ibid
nonetheless
concluded
desegregation
inures
primarily
benefit
minority
designed
purpose
ibid
emphasis
added
event
enough
minorities
may
consider
busing
integration
interest
quoting
hunter
supra
harlan
concurring
proceeded
heart
analysis
held
initiative
unconstitutional
since
removed
authority
address
racial
problem
racial
problem
existing
decisionmaking
body
way
burden
minority
interests
seattle
although
school
boards
washington
retained
authority
issues
matters
educational
policy
generally
initiative
minorities
favoring
busing
surmount
considerably
higher
hurdle
mere
petitioning
local
assembly
must
seek
relief
state
legislature
statewide
electorate
different
level
government
ibid
relentless
logic
hunter
seattle
point
similar
conclusion
case
cases
one
level
government
exercised
borrowed
authority
apparently
racial
issue
higher
level
government
called
loan
cases
deemed
revocation
violation
regardless
whether
facially
classified
according
race
reflected
invidious
purpose
discriminate
appeals
plurality
sees
differently
though
disavows
basis
hunter
seattle
decided
ante
take
next
step
overruling
cases
rather
reinterprets
beyond
recognition
hunter
plurality
suggests
case
challenged
act
target
ed
racial
minorities
ante
maybe
hunter
neither
found
considered
relevant
bypassing
question
intent
entirely
satisfied
newly
minted
theory
sufficed
invalidate
charter
amendment
seattle
really
going
according
plurality
initiative
consequence
purpose
preserving
harms
effected
prior
de
jure
segregation
thus
political
restriction
question
designed
used
likely
used
encourage
infliction
injury
reason
race
ante
conclusion
derived
opinion
recently
discovered
evidence
city
seattle
cause
schools
racial
imbalance
along
although
judicial
finding
de
jure
segregation
respect
seattle
school
district
appears
though
school
segregation
district
may
partial
result
school
board
policies
ante
district
effort
end
racial
imbalance
stymied
initiative
meant
people
passing
somehow
become
complicit
seattle
status
quo
whether
knew
hence
seattle
infliction
specific
presumably
constitutional
injury
ante
describes
opinion
seattle
might
assuredly
opinion
assumes
throughout
seattle
schools
suffered
de
facto
segregation
see
segregation
product
state
action
private
choices
constitutional
implications
freeman
anywhere
state
current
racial
imbalance
judicially
remediable
effect
prior
de
jure
segregation
absence
de
jure
segregation
effects
de
jure
segregation
necessary
premise
seattle
opinion
made
issue
busing
pupil
reassignment
matter
political
choice
rather
judicial
precisely
question
political
branches
decide
manner
say
process
resolution
implicated
new
process
theory
opinion
says
absence
constitutional
violation
desirability
efficacy
school
desegregation
matters
resolved
though
political
process
present
purposes
enough
hold
reallocation
political
decision
higher
level
unconstitutional
minorities
may
consider
busing
integration
legislation
interest
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
patently
atextual
unadministrable
contrary
traditional
jurisprudence
hunter
seattle
overruled
problems
doctrine
begin
triggering
prong
assigns
task
determining
whether
law
reallocates
policymaking
authority
concerns
racial
issue
seattle
seattle
takes
couple
dissatisfying
cracks
defining
crucial
term
suggests
issue
racial
adopting
one
position
question
bottom
inur
primarily
benefit
minority
designed
purpose
irrelevant
hunter
seattle
racial
minority
racial
majority
benefit
policy
question
members
groups
favor
judges
instead
focus
guesswork
juridical
sense
primarily
benefit
minorities
cf
ibid
regarding
dispositive
cases
suggest
beneficial
minorities
second
thought
maybe
judges
need
ask
question
possible
minorities
may
consider
policy
question
interest
sure
dealing
racial
issue
good
come
random
judicial
musing
plurality
gives
two
convincing
reasons
one
thing
involves
judges
dirty
business
dividing
nation
racial
blocs
metro
broadcasting
fcc
dissenting
ante
task
difficult
unappealing
indian
latino
interests
interests
half
worse
exercise
promotes
noxious
fiction
knowing
person
color
ethnicity
sure
predetermined
set
policy
interests
thus
reinforc
ing
perception
members
racial
group
regardless
age
education
economic
status
community
live
think
alike
share
political
interests
shaw
reno
whether
done
judge
school
board
racial
stereotyping
odds
equal
protection
mandates
miller
johnson
racial
issue
prong
defect
fundamentally
misreads
equal
protection
clause
protect
particular
group
construction
tirelessly
repudiated
long
line
cases
understanding
equal
protection
personal
right
adarand
constructors
peña
basic
principle
fifth
fourteenth
amendments
constitution
protect
persons
groups
metro
broadcasting
supra
kennedy
dissenting
yet
seattle
insists
alterations
burden
racial
minorities
deny
equal
protection
majority
needs
protection
discrimination
quoting
hunter
years
since
seattle
repeatedly
rejected
reading
guarantee
equal
protection
level
scrutiny
varies
according
ability
different
groups
defend
interests
representative
process
richmond
croson
meant
obliterate
rather
endorse
practice
racial
classifications
fourteenth
amendment
guarantees
obtai
equal
force
regardless
race
burdened
benefitted
miller
supra
quoting
croson
supra
plurality
opinion
adarand
supra
equal
protection
clause
mean
one
thing
applied
one
individual
something
else
applied
person
another
color
accorded
protection
equal
regents
univ
cal
bakke
opinion
powell
dissent
trots
old
saw
derived
dictum
legislation
motivated
discrete
insular
merits
exacting
judicial
scrutiny
post
quoting
carolene
products
say
derived
dictum
expressed
majority
dictum
merely
said
need
enquire
whether
prejudice
discrete
insular
minorities
may
special
condition
emphasis
added
dissent
argue
course
prejudice
produced
explain
certain
racial
minorities
michigan
qualify
meaning
groups
form
coalitions
critically
lack
common
interests
strauss
carolene
products
obsolete
rev
even
make
case
group
discreteness
insularity
political
liabilities
rather
political
serious
question
alone
demonstrates
prudence
carolene
products
dictumizers
leaving
enquir
another
day
question
whether
legislation
restricts
political
processes
ordinarily
expected
bring
repeal
undesirable
legislation
subjected
exacting
judicial
scrutiny
carolene
products
found
unnecessary
consider
dissent
thinks
worth
considering
today
explain
election
university
governing
board
political
process
ordinarily
expected
bring
repeal
undesirable
legislation
michigan
voters
ability
amend
constitution
seems
quite
opposite
amending
constitution
requires
approval
majority
electors
voting
question
mich
art
xii
contrast
voting
favorable
board
eight
members
three
major
public
universities
requires
electing
majority
vote
least
different
candidates
several
running
different
election
cycles
see
bamn
regents
univ
sutton
dissenting
michigan
voters
instead
amending
constitution
pursued
dissent
preferred
path
electing
board
members
promising
abolish
admissions
policies
post
harder
easier
racial
minorities
favoring
affirmative
action
overturn
decision
important
point
design
jurisprudence
conform
dictum
opinion
moving
appalling
absurd
turn
second
part
analysis
apparently
administrable
first
compare
post
breyer
concurring
judgment
case
involve
reordering
political
process
post
sotomayor
dissenting
yes
part
inquiry
directs
determine
whether
challenged
act
place
effective
decisionmaking
authority
racial
issue
different
level
government
seattle
laws
hunter
seattle
thought
fail
test
cases
effect
challenged
action
redraw
decisionmaking
authority
racial
matters
racial
matters
way
place
comparative
burdens
minorities
said
state
may
contrast
another
line
cases
emphasized
sovereignty
state
design
governing
structure
sees
fit
generally
state
afforded
wide
leeway
experimenting
appropriate
allocation
state
legislative
power
may
create
political
subdivisions
cities
counties
convenient
agencies
exercising
governmental
powers
state
may
entrusted
holt
civic
club
tuscaloosa
quoting
hunter
pittsburgh
accordingly
absolute
discretion
determine
number
nature
duration
powers
conferred
upon
municipal
corporations
territory
shall
exercised
holt
civic
club
supra
seem
go
without
saying
state
may
give
certain
powers
cities
later
assign
powers
counties
even
reclaim
taken
limits
logic
gaping
exception
nearly
swallows
rule
structural
state
sovereignty
indeed
fourteenth
amendment
forbids
place
effective
decisionmaking
authority
racial
issues
different
level
government
must
true
amendment
ratification
worked
partial
ossification
state
governing
structure
rendering
basically
irrevocable
power
subordinate
state
official
day
fourteenth
amendment
passage
happened
enjoy
legislatively
conferred
authority
racial
issue
fourteenth
amendment
subordinate
entity
suppose
city
council
take
action
issue
action
either
favorable
unfavorable
minorities
even
reverse
later
however
redelegate
power
even
lower
level
state
government
committee
without
forfeiting
since
necessary
effect
wresting
back
put
additional
obstacle
path
minorities
likewise
entity
official
higher
state
chain
county
board
exercise
authority
issue
even
state
legislature
people
constitutional
amendment
revoke
legislative
conferral
power
subordinate
whether
city
council
subcommittee
county
board
seattle
logic
create
safe
havens
wherever
subordinate
officials
public
universities
traditionally
enjoyed
effective
decisionmaking
authority
admissions
policy
yet
used
authority
prohibit
admissions
decisions
mere
existence
subordinate
discretion
matter
work
kind
reverse
strange
notion
alien
system
local
governmental
bodies
forever
ability
state
sovereign
power
address
matter
compelling
concern
state
powell
dissenting
precisely
doctrine
contemplates
perhaps
spirit
seattle
especially
disquieted
enactments
constitutional
amendments
appears
dissent
position
problem
suggests
amending
michigan
constitution
simply
part
state
existing
political
process
post
peculiar
notion
revision
state
fundamental
law
made
precisely
manner
law
prescribes
people
source
law
authority
part
political
process
people
law
exist
surely
come
news
people
michigan
since
amended
constitution
times
brief
gary
segura
et
al
amici
curiae
even
dissent
concludes
amendment
attacked
worked
illicit
chang
ing
basic
rules
political
process
state
middle
game
post
one
might
ask
amendment
provision
michigan
constitution
one
perhaps
basic
one
rules
state
political
process
democratic
invocation
provision
qualify
working
existing
political
process
post
ii
part
ways
hunter
seattle
think
plurality
additional
reason
endorses
version
proposition
facially
neutral
law
may
deny
equal
protection
solely
disparate
racial
impact
theories
squarely
soundly
rejected
unwavering
line
cases
holds
violation
equal
protection
clause
requires
state
action
motivated
discriminatory
intent
hernandez
new
york
concurring
judgment
official
action
held
unconstitutional
solely
results
racially
disproportionate
impact
arlington
heights
metropolitan
housing
development
indeed
affirmed
principle
day
decided
seattle
ven
neutral
law
disproportionately
adverse
effect
racial
minority
fourteenth
amendment
violated
discriminatory
purpose
shown
crawford
board
ed
los
angeles
notwithstanding
dozens
cases
confirming
nature
washington
davis
rule
plurality
opinion
leaves
ajar
escape
hatch
modeled
hunter
seattle
suggesting
state
action
denies
equal
protection
ha
serious
risk
purpose
causing
specific
injuries
account
race
either
designed
used
likely
used
encourage
infliction
injury
reason
race
ante
emphasis
added
since
formulations
enable
determination
violation
discriminatory
intent
inconsistent
long
washington
davis
line
respondents
argue
need
bother
test
since
may
struck
straightforwardly
racial
classification
admitting
must
face
distribut
burdens
benefits
basis
individual
racial
classifications
parents
involved
community
schools
seattle
school
dist
respondents
rely
seattle
statement
political
process
decisionmaking
mechanism
used
address
racially
conscious
legislation
legislation
singled
peculiar
disadvantageous
treatment
singling
racial
classification
theory
bedecked
different
doctrinal
dress
law
neither
says
implies
persons
treated
differently
account
race
racial
classification
crawford
supra
particularly
true
statutes
mandating
equal
treatment
law
prohibits
state
classifying
individuals
race
fortiori
classify
individuals
race
coalition
economic
equity
wilson
thus
question
case
every
case
neutral
state
action
said
deny
equal
protection
account
race
whether
action
reflects
racially
discriminatory
purpose
seattle
stresses
singling
political
processes
affecting
racial
issues
uniquely
disadvantageous
treatment
inevitably
raises
dangers
impermissible
motivation
true
enough
motivation
must
proved
respondents
prayer
proving
district
noted
conventional
equal
protection
doctrine
suit
doom
ed
supp
ed
though
appeals
opine
question
leave
remand
view
law
expressly
requiring
state
actors
afford
persons
equal
protection
laws
initiative
seattle
though
charter
amendment
hunter
deny
person
equal
protection
laws
amdt
regardless
whatever
evidence
seemingly
foul
purposes
plaintiffs
may
cook
trial
justice
harlan
observed
century
ago
ur
constitution
neither
knows
tolerates
classes
among
citizens
plessy
ferguson
dissenting
opinion
people
michigan
wish
governing
charter
shameful
us
stand
breyer
concurring
judgment
bill
schuette
attorney
general
michigan
petitioner
coalition
defend
affirmative
action
integration
immigrant
rights
fight
equality
means
necessary
bamn
et
al
writ
certiorari
appeals
sixth
circuit
april
justice
breyer
concurring
judgment
michigan
amended
constitution
forbid
state
universities
colleges
discriminate
grant
preferential
treatment
individual
group
basis
race
sex
color
ethnicity
national
origin
operation
public
employment
public
education
public
contracting
mich
art
focus
prohibition
grant
ing
preferential
treatment
basis
race
public
education
agree
plurality
amendment
consistent
federal
equal
protection
clause
amdt
believe
different
reasons
first
address
amendment
insofar
forbids
use
admissions
programs
designed
remedy
past
exclusionary
racial
discrimination
direct
effects
discrimination
application
amendment
context
present
different
questions
may
demand
different
answers
rather
address
amendment
applies
forbids
programs
grutter
bollinger
rest
upon
one
justification
using
race
admissions
process
solely
order
obtai
educational
benefits
flow
diverse
student
body
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
second
dissenting
parents
involved
community
schools
seattle
school
dist
explained
believe
programs
kind
constitutional
whether
implemented
law
schools
universities
high
schools
elementary
schools
concluded
constitution
authorize
judges
either
forbid
require
adoption
solutions
kind
issue
serious
problems
best
administer
america
schools
help
create
society
includes
americans
continue
believe
constitution
permits
though
require
use
kind
programs
barred
michigan
constitution
serious
educational
problems
faced
americans
time
decided
grutter
endure
see
mullis
martin
foy
drucker
progress
international
reading
literacy
study
international
results
reading
exh
students
numerous
countries
outperform
counterparts
reading
mullis
martin
foy
arora
trends
international
mathematics
science
study
timss
international
results
mathematics
exh
mathematics
martin
mullis
foy
stanco
timss
international
results
science
exh
science
organisation
economic
development
oecd
education
glance
oecd
indicators
table
graduation
rate
lower
numerous
countries
mckinsey
economic
impact
achievement
gap
america
schools
apr
ranks
industrialized
nations
low
educational
achievement
continues
correlated
income
race
see
national
center
education
statistics
digest
education
statistics
advance
release
selected
digest
tables
table
white
americans
likely
completed
high
school
online
http
visited
apr
available
clerk
case
file
table
americans
bottom
quartile
income
likely
drop
high
school
table
white
americans
likely
enroll
college
table
americans
likely
enroll
college
americans
constitution
allows
local
state
national
communities
adopt
narrowly
tailored
programs
designed
bring
greater
inclusion
diversity
constitution
foresees
ballot
box
courts
normal
instrument
resolving
differences
debates
merits
programs
compare
parents
involved
breyer
dissenting
identifying
studies
showing
benefits
racially
integrated
education
thomas
concurring
identifying
studies
suggesting
racially
integrated
schools
may
confer
educational
benefits
short
constitution
creates
democratic
political
system
people
must
together
find
answers
disagreements
kind
breyer
dissenting
third
cases
hunter
erickson
washington
seattle
school
dist
reflect
important
principle
namely
individual
ability
participate
meaningfully
political
process
independent
race
although
racial
minorities
like
political
minorities
always
succeed
polls
must
opportunity
others
secure
ballot
box
policies
reflect
preferences
view
however
neither
hunter
seattle
applies
parties
suggest
amendment
violates
equal
protection
clause
doctrine
hunter
seattle
involved
efforts
manipulate
political
process
way
issue
cases
involved
restructuring
political
process
changed
political
level
policies
enacted
hunter
decisionmaking
moved
elected
city
council
local
electorate
large
seattle
decisionmaking
elected
school
board
replaced
decisionmaking
state
legislature
electorate
large
case
contrast
involve
reordering
political
process
fact
involve
movement
decisionmaking
one
political
level
another
rather
michigan
law
delegated
broad
policymaking
authority
elected
university
boards
see
mich
art
viii
boards
delegated
decisionmaking
authority
unelected
university
faculty
members
administrators
see
bylaws
univ
bd
regents
state
univ
bylaws
bd
trustees
preamble
state
univ
bylaws
academic
governance
wayne
state
univ
stat
although
boards
unquestionably
retained
power
set
policy
regarding
admissions
see
post
sotomayor
dissenting
fact
faculty
members
administrators
set
admissions
policies
question
often
true
elected
bodies
including
example
school
boards
city
councils
state
legislatures
power
enact
policies
fact
delegate
power
administrators
although
limited
times
university
boards
advised
content
admissions
policies
see
knowledge
board
voted
accept
reject
policies
thus
unelected
faculty
members
administrators
voters
elected
representatives
adopted
admissions
programs
affected
michigan
constitutional
amendment
amendment
took
decisionmaking
authority
away
unelected
actors
placed
hands
voters
matter
one
thing
considered
conceptually
doctrine
set
forth
hunter
seattle
easily
fit
case
cases
minorities
participated
political
process
majority
subsequent
reordering
political
process
repealed
minority
successes
made
difficult
minority
succeed
future
majority
thereby
diminished
minority
ability
participate
meaningfully
electoral
process
one
easily
characterize
movement
decisionmaking
mechanism
issue
administrative
process
electoral
process
diminishing
minority
ability
participate
meaningfully
political
process
prior
electoral
process
minority
participated
another
thing
extend
holding
hunter
seattle
reach
situations
decisionmaking
authority
moved
administrative
body
political
one
pose
significant
difficulties
administrative
process
encompasses
vast
numbers
decisionmakers
answering
numerous
policy
questions
hosts
different
fields
see
free
enterprise
fund
public
company
accounting
oversight
breyer
dissenting
administrative
bodies
modify
programs
detail
decisionmaking
authority
within
administrative
process
frequently
moves
around
due
amendments
statutes
new
administrative
rules
evolving
agency
practice
thus
particularly
difficult
context
judges
determine
change
locus
decisionmaking
authority
places
comparative
structural
burden
racial
minority
apply
hunter
seattle
administrative
process
tending
hinder
change
risk
discouraging
experimentation
interfering
efforts
see
policies
work
finally
principle
underlies
hunter
seattle
runs
competing
principle
discussed
competing
principle
favors
decisionmaking
though
democratic
process
principle
strongly
supports
right
people
elected
representatives
adopt
policies
reasons
inclusion
must
give
right
vote
said
discussion
limited
circumstances
decisionmaking
moved
unelected
administrative
body
politically
responsive
one
targeted
admissions
programs
consider
race
solely
order
obtain
educational
benefits
diverse
student
body
need
decide
whether
federal
constitution
permits
michigan
apply
constitutional
amendment
circumstances
hold
therefore
concur
judgment
sotomayor
dissenting
bill
schuette
attorney
general
michigan
petitioner
coalition
defend
affirmative
action
integration
immigrant
rights
fight
equality
means
necessary
bamn
et
al
writ
certiorari
appeals
sixth
circuit
april
justice
sotomayor
justice
ginsburg
joins
dissenting
fortunate
live
democratic
society
without
checks
democratically
approved
legislation
oppress
minority
groups
reason
constitution
places
limits
majority
people
may
case
implicates
one
limit
guarantee
equal
protection
laws
although
guarantee
traditionally
understood
prohibit
intentional
discrimination
existing
laws
equal
protection
end
another
fundamental
strand
equal
protection
jurisprudence
focuses
process
securing
citizens
right
participate
meaningfully
equally
right
bedrock
democracy
preserves
rights
yet
know
history
nation
understand
long
lamentable
record
stymieing
right
racial
minorities
participate
political
process
first
majority
acted
open
invidious
purpose
notwithstanding
command
fifteenth
amendment
certain
shut
racial
minorities
political
process
altogether
withholding
right
vote
intervened
preserve
right
majority
tried
replacing
outright
bans
voting
literacy
tests
good
character
requirements
poll
taxes
gerrymandering
fooled
invalidated
measures
majority
persisted
time
although
allowed
minority
access
political
process
majority
changed
ground
rules
process
make
difficult
minority
minority
alone
obtain
policies
designed
foster
racial
integration
although
political
restructurings
may
discriminatory
purpose
reaffirmed
right
minority
members
society
participate
meaningfully
equally
political
process
case
involves
last
chapter
discrimination
majority
michigan
electorate
changed
basic
rules
political
process
state
manner
uniquely
disadvantaged
racial
prior
enactment
constitutional
initiative
issue
admissions
policies
michigan
public
colleges
universities
including
admissions
hands
institution
governing
board
members
boards
nominated
political
parties
elected
citizenry
statewide
elections
century
shut
michigan
institutions
higher
education
racial
minorities
michigan
succeeded
persuading
elected
board
representatives
adopt
admissions
policies
took
account
benefits
racial
diversity
twice
blessed
efforts
first
regents
univ
cal
bakke
grutter
bollinger
case
concerned
michigan
admissions
policy
wake
grutter
voters
michigan
set
eliminate
use
admissions
policies
voters
course
free
pursue
end
number
ways
example
persuaded
existing
board
members
change
minds
individual
grassroots
lobbying
efforts
general
public
awareness
campaigns
mobilized
efforts
vote
uncooperative
board
members
office
replacing
members
share
desire
abolish
admissions
policies
holds
constitution
permits
particular
policy
nothing
prevents
majority
state
voters
choosing
adopt
policy
system
government
encourages
indeed
depends
type
democratic
action
instead
majority
michigan
voters
changed
rules
middle
game
reconfiguring
existing
political
process
michigan
manner
burdened
racial
minorities
election
amending
michigan
constitution
enact
art
provides
relevant
part
michigan
public
universities
shall
discriminate
grant
preferential
treatment
individual
group
basis
race
sex
color
ethnicity
national
origin
operation
public
employment
public
education
public
contracting
result
two
different
processes
michigan
citizen
permitted
influence
admissions
policies
state
universities
one
persons
interested
admissions
policies
one
everyone
else
citizen
university
michigan
alumnus
instance
advocate
admissions
policy
considers
applicant
legacy
status
meeting
individually
members
board
regents
convince
views
joining
legacy
parents
lobby
board
voting
supporting
board
candidates
share
position
options
available
citizen
wants
board
adopt
admissions
policies
consider
athleticism
geography
area
study
one
policy
michigan
citizen
may
seek
process
admissions
policy
considers
race
individualized
manner
clear
alternatives
adequate
achieve
diversity
policy
alone
citizens
michigan
must
undertake
daunting
task
amending
state
constitution
precedents
permit
political
restructurings
create
one
process
racial
minorities
separate
less
burdensome
process
everyone
else
held
fourteenth
amendment
tolerate
political
structure
treats
individuals
equals
yet
subtly
distorts
governmental
processes
way
place
special
burdens
ability
minority
groups
achieve
beneficial
legislation
washington
seattle
school
dist
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
restructuring
explained
permissible
denying
minority
right
vote
equal
basis
others
hunter
erickson
cases
hunter
seattle
recognized
known
doctrine
majority
reconfigures
political
process
manner
burdens
racial
minority
alteration
triggers
strict
judicial
scrutiny
today
disregarding
stare
decisis
majority
effectively
discards
precedents
plurality
tells
us
freedom
actually
secured
constitution
freedom
majority
michigan
citizens
exercised
privilege
enact
laws
basic
exercise
democratic
power
ante
demeaning
democratic
process
plurality
concludes
disturb
decision
way
ante
logic
embraces
majority
rule
without
important
constitutional
limit
plurality
decision
fundamentally
misunderstands
nature
injustice
worked
case
plurality
imagines
may
resolve
debate
use
race
higher
education
admissions
ante
agree
wholeheartedly
nothing
vests
resolution
debate
exclusively
courts
requires
remove
reach
electorate
rather
case
debate
use
admissions
policies
may
resolved
contra
must
resolved
constitutionally
permissible
ways
constitution
guarantee
minority
groups
victory
political
process
guarantee
meaningful
equal
access
process
guarantees
majority
may
win
stacking
political
process
minority
groups
permanently
forcing
minority
alone
surmount
unique
obstacles
pursuit
goals
educational
diversity
reasonably
accomplished
measures
today
permitting
majority
voters
michigan
constitution
forbids
ends
debate
admissions
policies
michigan
manner
contravenes
constitutional
protections
long
recognized
precedents
like
plurality
faith
citizenry
continue
learn
nation
regrettable
history
strive
move
beyond
injustices
towards
future
equality
believe
importance
public
discourse
matters
public
policy
part
ways
plurality
suggests
judicial
intervention
case
impede
rather
advance
democratic
process
ultimate
hope
equality
ante
firmly
believe
role
judges
includes
policing
process
stepping
necessary
secure
constitutional
guarantee
equal
protection
respectfully
dissent
much
history
nation
denied
many
citizens
right
participate
meaningfully
equally
politics
history
strive
put
behind
us
history
still
informs
society
live
one
must
address
candor
doctrine
best
understood
backdrop
history
briefly
trace
course
fifteenth
amendment
ratified
civil
war
promised
racial
minorities
right
vote
many
ignored
promise
addition
outright
tactics
fraud
intimidation
violence
countless
examples
categorically
denying
racial
minorities
access
political
process
consider
texas
statute
prevented
racial
minorities
participating
primary
elections
declared
statute
unconstitutional
nixon
herndon
texas
responded
changing
rules
enacted
new
statute
gave
political
parties
right
determine
participate
primaries
predictably
democratic
party
specified
white
democrats
participate
primaries
nixon
condon
invalidated
scheme
see
also
smith
allwright
terry
adams
less
direct
oklahoma
one
many
required
voters
pass
literacy
test
test
apply
equally
voters
grandfather
clause
voters
exempt
grandfathers
voters
served
soldiers
meant
course
black
voters
pass
test
many
white
voters
held
scheme
unconstitutional
guinn
response
oklahoma
changed
rules
enacted
new
statute
voters
qualified
vote
unconstitutional
grandfather
clause
remained
qualified
remaining
voters
apply
registration
within
period
lane
wilson
struck
statute
well
racial
minorities
occasionally
able
surmount
hurdles
political
participation
indeed
minority
citizens
even
able
win
elective
office
many
responded
fifteenth
amendment
subverting
minorities
access
polls
many
responded
prospect
elected
minority
officials
undermining
ability
minorities
win
hold
elective
office
blatantly
removed
black
officials
local
offices
see
rabinowitz
race
relations
urban
south
pp
describing
events
tennessee
virginia
others
changed
processes
local
officials
elected
see
extension
voting
rights
act
hearings
subcommittee
civil
constitutional
rights
house
committee
judiciary
pt
pp
hereinafter
hearings
statement
professor
morgan
kousser
black
judge
refused
resign
alabama
legislature
abolished
served
replaced
one
whose
judges
appointed
governor
rabinowitz
supra
north
carolina
legislature
divested
voters
right
elect
justices
peace
county
commissioners
arrogated
authority
select
justices
peace
gave
power
select
commissioners
stand
idly
alabama
example
legislature
responded
increased
black
voter
registration
city
tuskegee
amending
state
constitution
authorize
legislative
abolition
county
tuskegee
located
const
amdt
repealed
const
amdt
redrawing
city
boundaries
remove
black
voters
removing
single
white
voter
gomillion
lightfoot
intervened
finding
inconceivable
guaranties
embedded
constitution
manipulated
existence
cloaked
garb
political
realignment
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
landmark
ruling
brown
board
education
triggered
new
era
political
restructuring
time
context
education
virginia
general
assembly
transferred
control
student
assignment
local
school
districts
state
pupil
placement
board
see
muse
virginia
massive
resistance
legislature
learned
arlington
county
school
board
prepared
desegregation
plan
general
assembly
swiftly
retaliated
stripping
county
right
elect
school
board
popular
vote
instead
making
board
appointed
body
see
also
smith
closed
schools
similarly
disregarded
mandate
changing
political
process
see
bush
orleans
parish
school
supp
ed
la
louisiana
legislature
gave
governor
authority
supersede
school
board
decision
integrate
extension
voting
rights
act
hearings
et
al
subcommittee
house
committee
judiciary
statement
thomas
harris
assoc
gen
counsel
american
federation
labor
congress
industrial
organizations
mississippi
legislature
removed
people
right
elect
superintendents
education
counties
instead
made
positions
appointive
remained
true
command
brown
arkansas
example
enforced
desegregation
order
little
rock
school
board
cooper
aaron
day
announced
ruling
arkansas
legislature
responded
changing
rules
enacted
law
permitting
governor
close
public
school
state
stripping
local
school
districts
decisionmaking
authority
long
governor
determined
local
officials
maintain
general
suitable
efficient
educational
system
aaron
cooper
per
curiam
quoting
arkansas
statute
immediately
closed
little
rock
high
schools
see
also
breyer
making
democracy
work
discussing
events
little
rock
political
restructuring
efforts
went
beyond
context
education
many
tried
suppress
political
voice
racial
minorities
generally
reconfiguring
manner
filled
vacancies
local
offices
often
transferring
authority
electorate
minority
citizens
voice
local
level
executive
branch
minorities
wielded
little
influence
see
hearings
pt
report
cox
turner
alabama
legislature
changed
municipal
judgeships
elective
appointive
offices
report
hudlin
brimah
voter
educ
project
georgia
legislature
eliminated
elective
offices
made
others
appointive
appeared
minority
candidate
victorious
statement
frank
parker
director
lawyers
comm
civil
rights
law
mississippi
legislature
changed
manner
filling
vacancies
various
public
offices
election
appointment
ii
historical
context
intervened
hunter
erickson
washington
seattle
school
dist
together
hunter
seattle
recognized
fundamental
strand
equal
protection
jurisprudence
doctrine
understand
doctrine
fully
necessary
set
forth
detail
precisely
precisely
said
understand
hunter
seattle
understand
cases
straightforwardly
resolve
one
hunter
city
council
akron
ohio
enacted
fair
housing
ordinance
assure
equal
opportunity
persons
live
decent
housing
facilities
regardless
race
color
religion
ancestry
national
origin
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
majority
citizens
akron
disagreed
ordinance
overturned
majority
stop
also
amended
city
charter
prevent
city
council
implementing
future
ordinance
dealing
racial
religious
ancestral
discrimination
housing
without
approval
majority
akron
electorate
ibid
amendment
changed
rules
political
process
akron
described
result
change
follows
enact
ordinance
barring
housing
discrimination
basis
race
religion
proponents
obtain
approval
city
council
majority
voters
citywide
enact
ordinance
preventing
housing
discrimination
grounds
enact
type
housing
ordinance
proponents
needed
support
city
council
seattle
describing
hunter
emphasis
deleted
invalidated
akron
charter
amendment
equal
protection
clause
concluded
amendment
unjustifiably
place
special
burdens
racial
minorities
within
governmental
process
thus
effecting
real
substantial
invidious
denial
equal
protection
laws
hunter
characterized
amendment
permissible
denying
racial
minorities
right
vote
equal
basis
majority
state
may
disadvantage
particular
group
making
difficult
enact
legislation
behalf
may
dilute
person
vote
give
group
smaller
representation
another
comparable
size
vehicle
change
popular
referendum
move
sovereignty
people
explained
subject
constitutional
limitations
justice
harlan
joined
justice
stewart
wrote
concurrence
although
state
normally
allocate
political
power
according
general
principle
bears
far
heavier
burden
justification
reallocates
political
power
based
race
selective
reallocation
necessarily
makes
far
difficult
racial
minorities
achieve
legislation
interest
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
seattle
case
mirrors
one
us
applied
hunter
invalidate
statute
enacted
majority
washington
state
citizens
prohibited
racially
integrative
busing
wake
brown
early
seattle
school
district
began
taking
steps
cure
de
facto
racial
segregation
schools
among
measures
enacted
desegregation
plan
made
extensive
use
busing
mandatory
assignments
district
obligation
adopt
plan
brown
charged
school
boards
duty
integrate
schools
segregated
de
jure
racial
discrimination
finding
de
facto
segregation
seattle
schools
product
de
jure
discrimination
several
residents
opposed
desegregation
efforts
formed
committee
sued
enjoin
implementation
plan
efforts
failed
committee
sought
change
rules
political
process
drafted
statewide
initiative
designed
terminate
use
mandatory
busing
purposes
racial
integration
majority
state
citizens
approved
initiative
invalidated
initiative
equal
protection
clause
began
observing
equal
protection
laws
guarantees
racial
minorities
right
full
participation
political
life
community
beyond
dispute
explained
given
racial
ethnic
groups
may
denied
franchise
precluded
entering
political
process
reliable
meaningful
manner
ibid
equal
protection
clause
reaches
stated
reaffirming
principle
espoused
hunter
laws
structuring
political
institutions
allocating
political
power
according
neutral
principles
violate
constitution
different
analysis
required
state
allocates
governmental
power
nonneutrally
explicitly
using
racial
nature
decision
determine
decisionmaking
process
kind
state
action
observed
places
special
burdens
racial
minorities
within
governmental
process
making
difficult
certain
racial
religious
minorities
members
community
achieve
legislation
interest
ibid
rejecting
argument
initiative
racial
focus
found
desegregation
public
schools
like
akron
housing
ordinance
inure
primarily
benefit
minority
designed
purpose
minorities
good
reason
consider
busing
integration
interest
concluded
racial
focus
initiative
suffice
trigger
application
hunter
doctrine
quoting
hunter
harlan
concurring
next
concluded
practical
effect
initiative
work
reallocation
power
kind
condemned
hunter
seattle
explained
favoring
elimination
de
facto
school
segregation
must
seek
relief
state
legislature
statewide
electorate
yet
authority
student
assignment
decisions
well
areas
educational
policy
remains
vested
local
school
board
ibid
thus
initiative
required
favor
racial
integration
public
schools
surmount
considerably
higher
hurdle
persons
seeking
comparable
legislative
action
different
contexts
ibid
reaffirmed
repeal
modification
desegregation
antidiscrimination
laws
without
never
viewed
embodying
presumptively
invalid
racial
classification
quoting
crawford
board
ed
los
angeles
initiative
burdened
future
attempts
integrate
lodging
decisionmaking
authority
new
remote
level
government
mere
repeal
unconstitutionally
discriminatory
change
political
seattle
hunter
seattle
vindicated
principle
elementary
equal
protection
jurisprudence
essential
majority
may
suppress
minority
right
participate
equal
terms
political
process
doctrine
governmental
action
deprives
minority
groups
equal
protection
racial
focus
targeting
policy
program
inures
primarily
benefit
minority
seattle
alters
political
process
manner
uniquely
burdens
racial
minorities
ability
achieve
goals
process
faithful
application
doctrine
resoundingly
resolves
case
respondents
favor
section
racial
focus
seattle
clear
text
prohibits
michigan
public
colleges
universities
grant
ing
preferential
treatment
individual
group
basis
race
mich
art
like
desegregation
public
schools
admissions
policies
inur
primarily
benefit
minority
designed
increase
minorities
access
institutions
higher
petitioner
argues
admissions
policies
inur
primarily
benefit
minority
upheld
policies
insofar
educational
benefits
flow
diverse
student
body
grutter
conflict
pronouncement
grutter
reality
admissions
policies
benefit
minorities
rather
admissions
policies
compelling
state
interest
achieving
diverse
student
body
precisely
increase
minority
enrollment
necessarily
benefits
minority
groups
words
constitutionally
permissible
admissions
policies
serve
compelling
interest
obtaining
educational
benefits
flow
diverse
student
body
inure
benefit
racial
minorities
nothing
mutually
exclusive
two
cf
seattle
concluding
desegregation
plan
racial
focus
even
though
white
well
negro
children
benefit
exposure
racial
diversity
worth
emphasizing
moreover
relevant
admissions
policies
survived
strict
scrutiny
grutter
policies
rulings
forbidden
without
admissions
policy
must
use
race
flexibly
maintain
quota
must
limited
time
must
employed
serious
good
faith
consideration
workable
alternatives
policies
banned
meet
requirements
thus
already
constitute
least
restrictive
ways
advance
michigan
compelling
interest
diversity
higher
education
section
restructures
political
process
michigan
manner
places
unique
burdens
racial
minorities
establishes
distinct
burdensome
political
process
enactment
admissions
plans
consider
racial
diversity
long
enactment
michigan
constitution
granted
plenary
authority
matters
relating
michigan
public
universities
including
admissions
criteria
university
governing
board
see
mich
art
viii
establishing
board
regents
university
michigan
board
trustees
michigan
state
university
board
governors
wayne
state
university
boards
power
enact
ordinances
regulations
government
university
comp
laws
ann
west
see
also
government
university
vested
board
regents
corporation
independent
authority
within
scope
functions
equal
legislature
federated
publications
board
trustees
state
boards
indisputably
part
political
process
michigan
political
party
nominates
two
candidates
membership
board
board
members
elected
terms
general
statewide
election
see
comp
laws
ann
west
mich
art
viii
prior
board
candidates
frequently
included
views
admissions
campaigns
example
one
candidate
pledged
work
end
racist
degrading
system
see
league
women
voters
general
election
voter
guide
online
http
internet
materials
visited
apr
available
clerk
case
file
see
also
george
regents
race
tests
policy
detroit
free
press
noting
one
candidate
opposes
affirmative
action
admissions
policies
sa
minority
students
enactment
michigan
political
structure
permitted
supporters
opponents
admissions
policies
vote
candidates
choice
lobby
elected
politically
accountable
boards
section
reconfigured
structure
boards
retain
plenary
authority
admissions
criteria
except
admissions
change
admissions
policies
one
issue
michigan
citizen
must
instead
amend
michigan
constitution
small
task
place
proposed
constitutional
amendment
ballot
requires
either
support
houses
michigan
legislature
vast
number
signatures
michigan
voters
percent
total
number
votes
cast
preceding
gubernatorial
election
see
mich
art
xii
since
million
votes
cast
election
governor
signatures
currently
needed
win
ballot
spot
see
brief
gary
segura
et
al
amici
curiae
hereinafter
segura
brief
moreover
account
invalid
duplicative
signatures
initiative
sponsors
obtain
substantially
actual
required
number
signatures
typically
margin
quoting
tolbert
lowenstein
donovan
election
law
rules
using
initiatives
citizens
legislators
direct
democracy
bowler
donovan
tolbert
costs
qualifying
amendment
significant
example
vast
majority
petition
efforts
require
initiative
sponsors
hire
paid
petition
circulators
significant
expense
segura
brief
see
also
donovan
mooney
smith
state
local
politics
institutions
reform
hereinafter
donovan
many
difficult
place
measure
ballot
unless
professional
petition
firms
paid
collect
signatures
required
qualification
tolbert
supra
initiative
statewide
ballot
longer
much
measure
general
citizen
interest
test
fundraising
addition
cost
collecting
signatures
campaigning
majority
votes
expensive
endeavor
organizations
advocating
behalf
marginalized
groups
remain
outmoneyed
corporate
business
professional
organizations
strolovitch
forrest
social
economic
justice
movements
organizations
oxford
handbook
american
political
parties
interest
groups
maisel
berry
instance
million
spent
nationally
initiative
referendum
campaigns
nearly
million
spent
cycle
donovan
several
money
spent
ballot
initiative
campaigns
races
political
office
combined
ibid
indeed
amount
spent
initiative
referendum
campaigns
eclipsed
million
spent
president
obama
presidential
campaign
salant
spending
doubled
obama
led
campaign
bloomberg
news
online
http
news
michigan
constitution
rarely
amended
initiative
process
voters
placed
statewide
initiatives
michigan
ballot
passed
see
segura
brief
minority
groups
face
especially
uphill
battle
see
donovan
issues
dealing
racial
ethnic
matters
studies
show
racial
ethnic
minorities
end
losing
side
popular
vote
fact
difficult
find
even
single
statewide
initiative
state
voters
approved
policies
explicitly
favor
racial
ethnic
minority
groups
segura
brief
onerous
task
forces
michigan
citizen
complete
order
change
admissions
policies
michigan
public
colleges
universities
respect
racial
sensitivity
substantially
less
grueling
paths
remain
open
advocating
admissions
policies
constitutional
amendment
avenue
admissions
policies
may
obtained
effect
white
graduate
public
michigan
university
wishes
pass
historical
privilege
children
may
freely
lobby
board
university
favor
expanded
legacy
admissions
policy
whereas
black
michigander
denied
opportunity
attend
university
lobby
board
favor
policy
might
give
children
chance
never
might
never
absent
policy
reordering
political
process
contravenes
hunter
see
seattle
equal
protection
clause
prohibits
political
structure
treats
individuals
equals
yet
subtly
distorts
governmental
processes
way
place
special
burdens
ability
minority
groups
achieve
beneficial
legislation
citation
omitted
majority
alters
political
process
detriment
racial
minority
governmental
action
subject
strict
scrutiny
see
michigan
assert
satisfies
compelling
state
interest
settle
matter
plurality
sees
differently
disregarding
language
used
hunter
plurality
asks
us
contort
case
one
rests
unremarkable
principle
state
may
alter
procedures
government
target
racial
minorities
ante
plurality
recasts
seattle
case
state
action
question
serious
risk
purpose
causing
specific
injuries
account
race
ante
according
plurality
hunter
seattle
courts
concerned
efforts
reconfigure
political
process
detriment
racial
minorities
rather
cases
invalidated
governmental
actions
merely
reflected
invidious
purpose
discriminate
tenable
reading
cases
plurality
identifies
invidious
discrimination
necessary
result
restructuring
hunter
ante
impossible
assess
whether
housing
amendment
hunter
motivated
discriminatory
purpose
opinion
discuss
question
obvious
however
possibility
invidious
discrimination
played
role
reasoning
ordinarily
understand
precedents
mean
actually
say
later
think
said
hunter
clear
invalidated
akron
charter
amendment
impermissible
restructuring
political
process
action
motivated
discriminatory
intent
see
striking
akron
charter
amendment
places
special
burden
racial
minorities
within
governmental
process
similarly
plurality
disregards
seattle
actually
says
instead
opines
political
restriction
question
designed
used
likely
used
encourage
infliction
injury
reason
race
ante
plurality
derives
conclusion
seattle
evidence
unearthed
later
parents
involved
community
schools
seattle
school
dist
although
judicial
finding
de
jure
segregation
respect
seattle
school
district
appears
though
school
desegregation
district
may
partial
result
school
board
policies
white
students
transfer
black
schools
restricting
transfer
black
students
white
schools
ante
quoting
parents
involved
breyer
dissenting
emphasis
added
follows
according
plurality
seattle
desegregation
plan
constitutionally
required
initiative
halting
plan
instance
invidious
discrimination
aimed
inflicting
racial
injury
plurality
might
prefer
seattle
said
plainly
suggest
presence
de
jure
segregation
seattle
quite
opposite
opinion
explicitly
suggested
desegregation
plan
adopted
remedy
de
facto
rather
de
jure
segregation
see
referring
absen
ce
finding
prior
de
jure
segregation
moreover
assumed
constitutional
violation
de
jure
segregation
occurred
unmistakably
rested
decision
hunter
holding
seattle
initiative
invalid
use
racial
nature
issue
define
governmental
decisionmaking
structure
thus
impose
substantial
unique
burdens
racial
minorities
nothing
short
baffling
plurality
insist
face
clear
language
hunter
seattle
saying
otherwise
cases
nothing
intentional
invidious
infliction
racial
injury
ante
describing
injury
hunter
demonstrated
injury
basis
race
ante
describing
injury
seattle
injur
account
race
plurality
attempt
rewrite
hunter
seattle
cast
aside
doctrine
sub
silentio
impermissible
matter
stare
decisis
doctrine
stare
decisis
usually
stand
decisions
even
disagree
people
rely
say
believe
take
us
word
doctrine
plurality
revision
hunter
seattle
unclear
left
plurality
certainly
tell
us
point
point
agree
justice
scalia
plurality
rewritten
precedents
beyond
recognition
see
ante
opinion
concurring
judgment
justice
breyer
concludes
hunter
seattle
apply
section
reasons
move
relevant
decisionmaking
authority
one
political
level
another
rather
removed
authority
unelected
actors
placed
hands
voters
ante
opinion
concurring
judgment
bases
conclusion
premise
michigan
elected
boards
delegated
decisionmaking
authority
unelected
university
faculty
members
administrators
ibid
premise
simply
incorrect
one
thing
undeniable
prior
board
candidates
often
pledged
end
carry
use
admissions
policies
michigan
public
universities
see
supra
surely
empty
promises
indeed
issue
admissions
policies
often
dominated
board
elections
see
george
detroit
free
press
observing
race
university
michigan
board
regents
determine
future
university
affirmative
action
policies
kosseff
um
policy
may
hang
election
crain
detroit
business
noting
upcoming
election
determine
whether
university
continue
defend
affirmative
action
policies
university
michigan
admissions
policy
still
issue
regents
election
black
issues
higher
education
commenting
although
struck
university
michigan
undergraduate
admissions
policy
formulaic
issue
remains
important
one
several
people
running
upcoming
election
board
regents
moreover
careful
examination
boards
governing
structure
reveals
remain
actively
involved
setting
admissions
policies
procedures
take
wayne
state
university
example
board
governors
enacted
university
statutes
govern
running
institution
see
wayne
state
univ
online
http
number
statutes
establish
general
admissions
procedures
see
establishing
undergraduate
admissions
procedures
establishing
graduate
admissions
procedures
set
specific
instructions
university
officials
see
admissions
decisions
based
full
evaluation
student
academic
record
empirical
data
reflecting
characteristics
students
successfully
graduated
university
within
four
years
prior
year
student
applies
setting
requisite
grade
point
average
graduate
applicants
board
governors
give
primary
responsibility
admissions
matters
university
president
president
elected
answerable
board
brief
respondent
board
governors
wayne
state
university
et
al
university
officials
faculty
members
serv
important
advisory
role
recommending
educational
policy
board
alone
ultimately
controls
educational
policy
decides
whether
adopt
reject
admissions
recommendations
example
board
voted
recommendations
revise
guidelines
establishment
honors
curricula
including
admissions
criteria
modify
honor
point
criteria
graduate
admission
modify
maximum
number
transfer
credits
university
allow
certain
cases
articulation
agreements
rendered
modification
appropriate
see
also
providing
examples
board
review
ing
pass
ing
upon
admissions
requirements
course
voting
broader
issues
implementation
new
academic
programs
board
also
engages
robust
regular
review
administrative
actions
involving
admissions
policy
related
matters
public
universities
clearly
entrust
admissions
policy
university
officials
board
regents
university
michigan
example
gives
primary
responsibility
admissions
associate
vice
provost
executive
director
undergraduate
admissions
directors
admissions
bylaws
online
http
board
trustees
michigan
state
university
relies
president
make
recommendations
regarding
admissions
policies
bylaws
art
online
http
bylaws
bylaws
board
regents
board
trustees
make
clear
university
operations
remain
subject
control
brief
respondents
regents
university
michigan
board
trustees
michigan
state
university
et
al
boards
retain
ultimate
authority
adopt
reject
admissions
policies
least
three
ways
first
routinely
meet
university
officials
review
admissions
policies
including
admissions
policies
example
shortly
decisions
gratz
bollinger
grutter
president
university
michigan
appeared
university
board
regents
discuss
impact
decisions
university
see
proceedings
pp
july
online
http
six
members
board
voiced
strong
support
university
use
race
factor
admissions
june
president
appeared
board
discuss
changes
undergraduate
admissions
policies
june
march
university
provost
appeared
board
regents
present
strategies
increase
diversity
light
passage
proposal
proceedings
pp
mar
online
http
second
boards
may
enact
bylaws
respect
specific
admissions
policies
may
alter
admissions
policies
set
university
officials
board
regents
may
amend
bylaw
regular
meeting
board
special
meeting
provided
notice
given
regent
one
week
advance
bylaws
michigan
state
university
board
trustees
may
pon
recommendation
president
determine
establish
qualifications
students
admissions
level
bylaws
art
boards
may
also
permanently
remove
certain
admissions
decisions
university
authority
merely
theoretical
university
michigan
board
regents
revised
two
dozen
bylaws
two
fall
within
chapter
viii
section
regulating
admissions
practices
app
pet
cert
finally
boards
may
appoint
university
officials
share
admissions
goals
may
remove
officials
officials
goals
diverge
boards
university
michigan
board
regents
directly
appoints
university
associate
vice
provost
executive
director
undergraduate
admissions
michigan
state
university
board
trustees
elects
institution
president
brief
respondents
regents
university
michigan
board
trustees
michigan
state
university
et
al
salient
point
although
elected
politically
accountable
boards
may
well
entrust
university
officials
certain
admissions
responsibilities
often
weigh
admissions
policies
times
retain
complete
supervisory
authority
university
officials
admissions
decisions
question
elected
boards
michigan
power
eliminate
adopt
admissions
policies
prior
also
question
worked
impermissible
reordering
political
process
removed
power
elected
boards
placed
instead
higher
level
political
process
michigan
see
supra
case
different
hunter
seattle
respect
hunter
seattle
minorities
michigan
participated
political
process
ante
breyer
concurring
judgment
hunter
seattle
majority
subsequent
reordering
political
process
repealed
minority
successes
made
difficult
minority
succeed
future
thereby
diminish
ing
minority
ability
participate
meaningfully
electoral
process
ibid
therefore
need
consider
extend
ing
holding
hunter
seattle
reach
situations
decisionmaking
authority
moved
administrative
body
political
one
ibid
scenario
us
iii
doctrine
resolves
case
matter
stare
decisis
correct
matter
first
principles
constitution
majority
rule
without
limit
system
government
predicated
equilibrium
notion
majority
citizens
may
determine
governmental
policy
legislation
enacted
elected
representatives
overriding
principle
nonetheless
things
constitution
forbids
even
majority
citizens
doctrine
grounded
fourteenth
amendment
central
check
majority
rule
fourteenth
amendment
instructs
act
government
may
deny
person
equal
protection
laws
often
think
equal
protection
guarantee
government
apply
law
equal
fashion
intentionally
discriminate
minority
groups
equal
protection
laws
means
also
secures
right
citizens
participate
meaningfully
equally
process
laws
created
rights
fundamental
right
participate
meaningfully
equally
process
government
see
yick
wo
hopkins
political
rights
fundamental
preservative
rights
right
bedrock
democracy
recognized
inception
see
ely
democracy
distrust
constitution
overwhelmingly
concerned
one
hand
procedural
fairness
resolution
individual
disputes
ensuring
broad
participation
processes
distributions
government
come
surprise
political
process
channel
change
describing
importance
judiciary
policing
channels
political
change
means
citizens
may
obtain
desirable
legislation
repeal
undesirable
legislation
course
expect
minority
members
society
obtain
every
single
result
seek
political
process
least
views
conflict
majority
minority
plainly
right
prevail
majority
groups
given
political
contest
minority
right
play
rules
majority
right
hunter
seattle
boldly
vindicated
right
hardly
novel
time
hunter
seattle
example
focused
vital
importance
safeguarding
minority
groups
access
political
process
carolene
products
case
predated
hunter
years
explained
ordinary
social
economic
legislation
carries
presumption
constitutionality
may
true
legislation
offends
fundamental
rights
targets
minority
groups
citing
cases
involving
restrictions
right
vote
restraints
dissemination
information
interferences
political
organizations
prohibition
peaceable
assembly
recognized
legislation
restricts
political
processes
ordinarily
expected
bring
repeal
undesirable
legislation
worthy
exacting
judicial
scrutiny
general
prohibitions
fourteenth
amendment
types
legislation
see
also
ely
supra
explaining
aragraph
two
carolene
products
suggests
appropriate
function
keep
machinery
democratic
government
running
make
sure
channels
political
participation
communication
kept
open
also
noted
prejudice
discrete
insular
minorities
may
special
condition
tends
seriously
curtail
operation
political
processes
ordinarily
relied
upon
protect
minorities
may
call
correspondingly
searching
judicial
inquiry
carolene
products
see
also
ely
supra
explaining
aragraph
three
carolene
products
suggests
also
concern
majorities
minorities
particularly
mentioning
laws
religious
national
racial
minorities
infected
prejudice
values
identified
carolene
products
lie
heart
doctrine
indeed
seattle
explicitly
relied
carolene
products
see
hen
state
allocation
power
places
unusual
burdens
ability
racial
groups
enact
legislation
specifically
designed
overcome
condition
prejudice
governmental
action
seriously
operation
political
processes
ordinarily
relied
upon
protect
quoting
carolene
products
values
central
tenets
equal
protection
jurisprudence
cases
recognize
least
three
features
right
meaningful
participation
political
process
two
thankfully
uncontroversial
first
every
eligible
citizen
right
vote
see
shaw
reno
woefully
always
case
right
one
take
issue
today
second
majority
may
make
difficult
minority
exercise
right
vote
widely
accepted
invalidated
grandfather
clauses
good
character
requirements
poll
taxes
gerrymandering
third
feature
one
plurality
dismantles
today
majority
may
reconfigure
existing
political
process
manner
creates
system
political
change
subjecting
laws
designed
protect
benefit
discrete
insular
minorities
burdensome
political
process
laws
doctrine
hunter
seattle
colleagues
stop
second
plurality
embraces
freedom
without
limits
see
ante
justice
scalia
values
notion
state
sovereignty
see
ante
opinion
concurring
judgment
wrong
sought
corrected
doctrine
say
one
concern
us
event
beyond
reach
fourteenth
amendment
see
role
protecting
political
process
ends
removed
certain
barriers
minority
participation
process
say
must
sit
back
let
majority
rule
without
key
constitutional
limit
recognized
hunter
seattle
view
drains
fourteenth
amendment
one
core
teachings
contrary
today
decision
protecting
right
meaningful
participation
political
process
must
mean
simply
removing
barriers
participation
must
mean
vigilantly
policing
political
process
ensure
majority
use
methods
prevent
minority
groups
partaking
process
equal
footing
reason
guard
right
every
citizen
vote
fforts
reduce
impact
minority
votes
contrast
direct
attempts
block
access
ballot
minority
voting
shelby
county
holder
ginsburg
dissenting
slip
efforts
reconfigure
political
process
ways
uniquely
disadvantage
minority
groups
already
long
disadvantaged
barriers
recognized
seattle
minorities
less
powerless
vote
without
racial
criterion
used
assign
governmental
power
way
exclude
particular
racial
groups
effective
participation
political
proces
accept
first
two
features
right
meaningful
participation
political
process
renouncing
third
paves
way
majority
done
time
throughout
nation
history
afford
minority
opportunity
participate
yet
manipulate
ground
rules
ensure
minority
defeat
entirely
odds
idea
equality
law
reiterate
none
say
doctrine
prohibits
exercise
democratic
nothing
prevents
majority
citizens
pursuing
obtaining
preferred
outcome
political
contest
instance
agree
plurality
michiganders
unhappy
grutter
free
pursue
end
admissions
policies
state
see
ante
free
elect
governing
boards
opposed
admissions
policies
public
discourse
dialogue
lobby
existing
boards
toward
end
also
free
remove
boards
authority
make
decisions
respect
admissions
policies
opposed
decisions
concerning
admissions
policies
majority
consistent
constitution
change
ground
rules
political
process
manner
makes
difficult
racial
minorities
alone
achieve
goals
majority
effectively
rigs
contest
guarantee
particular
outcome
wrong
doctrine
seeks
remedy
doctrine
hews
unremarkable
notion
two
competitors
running
race
one
may
require
run
twice
far
scale
obstacles
present
first
runner
course
bamn
regents
univ
michigan
doctrine
also
follows
rest
equal
protection
jurisprudence
particular
reapportionment
vote
dilution
cases
cases
described
right
vote
essence
democratic
society
shaw
rejected
use
ostensibly
measures
prevent
minorities
exercising
political
rights
see
invalidated
practices
electoral
systems
reduce
nullify
minority
group
ability
vote
cohesive
unit
practices
adopted
discriminatory
purpose
cases
like
doctrine
sought
preserve
political
rights
minority
two
recent
cases
involving
discriminatory
restructurings
political
process
also
worthy
mention
romer
evans
league
latin
american
citizens
perry
lulac
romer
involved
colorado
constitutional
amendment
removed
local
political
process
issue
primarily
affecting
gay
lesbian
citizens
amendment
enacted
response
number
local
ordinances
prohibiting
discrimination
gay
citizens
repealed
ordinances
effectively
prohibited
adoption
similar
ordinances
future
without
another
amendment
state
constitution
although
apply
doctrine
case
resonates
principles
undergirding
doctrine
rejected
attempt
majority
transfer
decisionmaking
authority
localities
targeted
minority
group
influence
process
state
government
less
ability
participate
effectively
see
describing
type
political
restructuring
disability
minority
group
rather
able
appeal
municipalities
policy
changes
commented
minority
forced
enlis
citizenry
colorado
amend
state
constitution
case
lulac
voting
rights
act
case
involved
enactment
texas
legislature
redrew
district
lines
number
texas
seats
house
representatives
plurality
opinion
striking
enactment
acknowledged
history
texas
upon
rights
hispanics
register
vote
participate
otherwise
electoral
process
observed
social
economic
legacy
past
discrimination
may
well
ed
ability
participate
effectively
political
process
backdrop
found
latino
voters
poised
elect
candidate
choice
state
enactment
took
away
opportunity
exercise
refused
sustain
resulting
vote
dilution
group
beginning
achieve
goal
overcoming
prior
electoral
discrimination
romer
lulac
using
different
analytic
framework
applied
core
teaching
hunter
seattle
political
process
restructured
manner
makes
difficult
traditionally
excluded
group
work
existing
process
seek
beneficial
policies
events
giving
rise
lulac
strikingly
similar
redistricting
prevented
latinos
texas
attaining
benefit
fought
poised
enjoy
prevents
racial
minorities
michigan
enjoying
benefit
fought
existing
political
processes
iv
colleagues
claim
doctrine
unadministrable
contrary
recent
equal
protection
precedents
see
ante
plurality
opinion
ante
scalia
concurring
judgment
acknowledging
certain
strands
jurisprudence
reach
conclusion
start
claim
hunter
seattle
longer
viable
cases
come
note
view
many
precedents
departed
mandate
equal
protection
clause
first
place
applying
strict
scrutiny
actions
designed
benefit
rather
burden
minority
see
gratz
ginsburg
dissenting
see
government
decisionmakers
may
properly
distinguish
policies
exclusion
inclusion
actions
designed
burden
groups
long
denied
full
citizenship
stature
sensibly
ranked
measures
taken
hasten
day
entrenched
discrimination
aftereffects
extirpated
citation
omitted
breyer
concurring
judgment
agree
implementing
constitution
equality
instruction
government
decisionmakers
may
properly
distinguish
policies
inclusion
exclusion
former
likely
prove
consistent
basic
constitutional
obligation
law
respect
individual
equally
citation
omitted
adarand
constructors
peña
stevens
dissenting
moral
constitutional
equivalence
policy
designed
perpetuate
caste
system
one
seeks
eradicate
racial
subordination
invidious
discrimination
engine
oppression
subjugating
disfavored
group
enhance
maintain
power
majority
remedial
preferences
reflect
opposite
impulse
desire
foster
equality
society
wygant
jackson
bd
marshall
dissenting
dealing
action
eliminate
pernicious
vestiges
past
discrimination
less
exacting
standard
review
appropriate
fullilove
klutznick
marshall
concurring
judgment
governmental
action
designed
remed
continuing
effects
past
racial
discrimination
subjected
conventional
bakke
brennan
white
marshall
blackmun
concurring
judgment
part
dissenting
part
racial
classifications
designed
remedial
purposes
subjected
intermediate
scrutiny
even
assuming
strict
scrutiny
apply
policies
designed
benefit
racial
minorities
view
inconsistent
hunter
seattle
nothing
said
last
years
undermines
principles
announced
cases
justice
scalia
first
argues
doctrine
misreads
equal
protection
clause
protect
group
running
counter
line
cases
treat
protection
personal
right
ante
opinion
concurring
judgment
quoting
adarand
equal
protection
says
protects
groups
ante
quoting
adarand
criticism
ignores
obvious
discrimination
individual
occurs
individual
membership
particular
group
yes
equal
protection
personal
right
equal
protection
violation
unless
injured
individual
member
protected
group
class
individuals
membership
group
racial
minority
gives
rise
equal
protection
violation
relatedly
justice
scalia
argues
doctrine
inconsistent
precedents
protects
minority
political
restructurings
aspect
doctrine
says
tolerated
precedents
rejected
reading
guarantee
equal
protection
level
scrutiny
varies
according
ability
different
groups
defend
interests
representative
process
ante
quoting
richmond
croson
plurality
opinion
equal
protection
continues
mean
one
thing
applied
one
individual
something
else
applied
person
another
color
ante
quoting
bakke
opinion
powell
justice
scalia
troubled
doctrine
applied
trigger
strict
scrutiny
political
restructurings
burden
majority
doctrine
inapplicable
majority
minority
achieve
restructurings
majority
majority
well
majority
seattle
explained
majority
needs
protection
discriminat
ory
restructurings
referendum
instance
might
bothersome
stated
differently
doctrine
protects
minority
implicates
problem
affects
minority
nothing
opinion
suggests
justice
scalia
says
doctrine
constitution
prohibits
discrimination
minority
groups
majority
groups
ante
minority
somehow
managed
effectuate
political
restructuring
burdened
majority
decide
whether
apply
doctrine
safeguard
political
right
majority
restructuring
us
fathom
achieved
justice
scalia
next
invokes
state
sovereignty
arguing
emphasized
sovereignty
state
design
governing
structure
sees
fit
ante
opinion
concurring
judgment
state
sovereignty
absolute
subject
constitutional
limits
surely
offend
state
sovereignty
barring
changing
voting
procedures
exclude
racial
minorities
doctrine
offend
state
sovereignty
doctrine
takes
nothing
away
state
sovereignty
equal
protection
clause
require
says
state
may
reconfigure
existing
political
processes
manner
establishes
distinct
burdensome
process
minority
members
society
alone
obtain
legislation
interests
broadly
justice
scalia
troubled
doctrine
create
supposed
safe
havens
places
ordinary
political
process
thus
far
produced
admissions
policies
ante
explained
previously
voters
michigan
opposed
admissions
policies
number
options
available
challenge
policies
see
supra
decisions
regarding
admissions
policies
subject
political
process
first
place
voters
entirely
free
eliminate
policies
via
constitutional
amendment
action
reallocate
power
manner
condemned
hunter
seattle
course
present
seattle
recognized
careful
balance
state
sovereignty
constitutional
protections
undervalue
magnitude
state
interest
system
education
washington
reserved
state
officials
right
make
decisions
areas
education
student
assignment
chosen
however
use
elaborate
system
done
state
obligated
operate
system
within
confines
fourteenth
amendment
true
michigan
finally
justice
scalia
disagrees
proposition
facially
neutral
law
may
deny
equal
protection
solely
disparate
racial
impact
ante
opinion
concurring
judgment
acknowledge
however
act
draws
racial
distinctions
makes
racial
classifications
triggers
strict
scrutiny
regardless
whether
discriminatory
intent
shown
see
adarand
settle
matter
section
draws
racial
distinction
seattle
explained
political
process
decisionmaking
mechanism
used
address
racially
conscious
legislation
legislation
singled
peculiar
disadvantageous
treatment
governmental
action
plainly
rests
based
race
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
see
also
noting
although
state
may
governmental
power
basis
general
principle
may
use
racial
considerations
define
governmental
decisionmaking
structure
justice
scalia
view
cases
like
washington
davis
arlington
heights
metropolitan
housing
development
call
seattle
question
odd
suggest
prior
precedents
call
question
later
one
seattle
decided
postdated
washington
davis
arlington
heights
justice
scalia
suggestion
seattle
runs
afoul
principles
established
washington
davis
arlington
heights
come
surprise
justice
blackmun
joined
majority
opinions
three
cases
indeed
seattle
explicitly
rejected
argument
hunter
effectively
overruled
washington
davis
arlington
heights
one
immediate
crucial
difference
hunter
cases
decisions
washington
davis
arlington
heights
considered
classifications
facially
unrelated
race
charter
amendment
issue
hunter
dealt
explicitly
racial
terms
legislation
designed
benefit
minorities
minorities
legislation
intended
benefit
larger
group
underprivileged
citizens
among
minorities
disproportionately
represented
concluded
hunter
amendment
seattle
initiative
rested
distinctions
based
race
colleagues
also
attack
first
prong
doctrine
rais
ing
serious
constitutional
concerns
ante
plurality
opinion
unadministrable
ante
scalia
concurring
judgment
justice
scalia
wonders
whether
judges
equipped
weigh
constitutes
racial
issue
see
ante
plurality
thinks
courts
clear
legal
standards
accepted
sources
guide
judicial
decision
ante
yet
justice
scalia
recognizes
hunter
seattle
provide
standard
public
policy
issue
inur
primarily
benefit
minority
designed
purpose
seattle
see
ante
surely
kind
factual
inquiry
judges
capable
making
justice
scalia
instance
accepts
standard
announced
washington
davis
requires
judges
determine
whether
discrimination
intentional
whether
merely
discriminatory
effect
inquiry
least
difficult
judges
one
called
hunter
seattle
event
clear
constitutional
amendment
case
racial
focus
facially
operation
law
disadvantages
minorities
see
supra
good
come
inquiries
justice
scalia
responds
divide
nation
along
racial
lines
perpetuate
racial
stereotypes
ante
plurality
shares
view
tells
us
must
assume
individuals
race
think
alike
see
ante
said
desegregation
members
racial
minority
seattle
necessarily
regarded
integration
public
schools
good
policy
yet
seattle
little
difficulty
saying
school
integration
general
matter
inure
benefit
minority
colleagues
view
leave
race
picture
entirely
let
voters
sort
see
ante
plurality
opinion
racial
division
validated
discouraged
seattle
formulation
remain
force
ante
scalia
concurring
judgment
acial
stereotyping
odds
equal
protection
seen
reasoning
see
parents
involved
way
stop
discrimination
basis
race
stop
discriminating
basis
race
sentiment
touch
reality
one
required
constitution
one
properly
rejected
sufficient
resolve
cases
nature
kennedy
concurring
part
concurring
judgment
enduring
hope
race
matter
reality
often
acial
discrimination
ancient
history
bartlett
strickland
plurality
opinion
race
matters
race
matters
part
long
history
racial
minorities
denied
access
political
process
see
part
supra
see
also
south
carolina
katzenbach
describing
racial
discrimination
voting
insidious
pervasive
evil
perpetuated
certain
parts
country
unremitting
ingenious
defiance
constitution
although
made
great
strides
voting
discrimination
still
exists
one
doubts
shelby
county
slip
race
also
matters
persistent
racial
inequality
society
inequality
ignored
produced
stark
socioeconomic
disparities
see
gratz
ginsburg
dissenting
cataloging
many
ways
effects
centuries
inequality
remain
painfully
evident
communities
schools
areas
like
employment
poverty
access
health
care
housing
consumer
transactions
education
adarand
ginsburg
dissenting
recognizing
lingering
effects
discrimination
reflective
system
racial
caste
recently
ended
evident
workplaces
markets
neighborhoods
race
matters
reasons
really
skin
deep
discussed
way
wished
away
race
matters
young
man
view
society
spends
teenage
years
watching
others
tense
passes
matter
neighborhood
grew
race
matters
young
woman
sense
self
hometown
pressed
really
regardless
many
generations
family
country
race
matters
young
person
addressed
stranger
foreign
language
understand
english
spoken
home
race
matters
slights
snickers
silent
judgments
reinforce
crippling
thoughts
belong
colleagues
view
examining
racial
impact
legislation
perpetuates
racial
discrimination
refusal
accept
stark
reality
race
matters
regrettable
way
stop
discrimination
basis
race
speak
openly
candidly
subject
race
apply
constitution
eyes
open
unfortunate
effects
centuries
racial
discrimination
members
judiciary
tasked
intervening
carry
guarantee
equal
protection
sit
back
wish
away
rather
confront
racial
inequality
exists
society
view
works
harm
perpetuating
facile
notion
makes
race
matter
acknowledging
simple
truth
race
matter
although
constitutional
rights
stake
case
rights
substantive
policy
issue
undeniably
relevance
colleagues
see
ante
plurality
opinion
suggesting
admissions
policies
potential
become
source
resentments
hostilities
based
race
nation
seeks
put
behind
therefore
speak
response
century
racial
minorities
michigan
fought
bring
diversity
state
public
colleges
universities
advent
admissions
policies
institutions
like
others
around
country
essentially
segregated
two
black
students
admitted
university
michigan
first
race
see
expert
report
james
anderson
gratz
bollinger
ed
six
decades
later
still
black
students
university
ibid
number
risen
slightly
ibid
around
among
total
student
population
roughly
barely
percent
ibid
numbers
university
michigan
law
school
even
telling
law
school
produced
black
graduates
among
total
less
percent
see
app
grutter
bollinger
housing
extracurricular
policies
institutions
also
perpetuated
open
segregation
instance
incoming
students
permitted
opt
rooming
black
students
anderson
supra
fraternities
sororities
excluded
black
students
membership
defense
department
conducted
investigation
university
compliance
title
vi
civil
rights
act
made
recommendations
increasing
opportunities
minority
students
student
group
launched
number
protests
including
strike
demanding
university
increase
minority
enrollment
university
board
regents
responded
adopting
goal
percent
black
admissions
fall
university
continued
improve
admissions
encouraged
decision
bakke
case
told
nation
colleges
universities
consider
race
admissions
part
broader
goal
create
diverse
student
body
students
different
backgrounds
learn
together
thereby
learn
live
together
little
decade
ago
grutter
reaffirmed
understanding
upholding
admissions
policy
law
school
laid
rest
doubt
whether
student
body
diversity
compelling
interest
may
justify
use
race
admissions
policies
thing
past
michigan
even
though
experts
agree
research
shows
policies
making
difference
achieving
educational
diversity
grutter
michigan
law
school
spoke
candidly
strides
institution
taken
successfully
admissions
one
expert
retained
law
school
opined
admissions
system
dramatic
negative
effect
underrepresented
minority
admissions
grutter
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
testified
school
admitted
percent
underrepresented
minority
students
applied
opposed
percent
admitted
race
considered
ibid
underrepresented
minority
students
thus
constituted
percent
opposed
actual
percent
class
entered
ibid
michigan
public
colleges
universities
tell
us
today
board
regents
university
michigan
board
trustees
michigan
state
university
inform
us
institutions
achieve
benefits
diverse
student
body
without
admissions
plans
see
brief
respondents
regents
university
michigan
board
trustees
michigan
state
university
et
al
proceedings
lower
courts
several
university
officials
testified
depress
minority
enrollment
michigan
public
universities
director
undergraduate
admissions
university
michigan
expressed
doubts
ability
maintain
minority
enrollment
use
proxy
like
socioeconomic
status
supp
app
pet
cert
explained
university
officials
laws
similar
sort
racial
ethnic
diversity
prior
measures
without
considering
race
ibid
similarly
law
school
dean
admissions
testified
expected
decline
minority
admissions
view
impossible
get
critical
mass
underrepresented
minorities
without
considering
race
ibid
dean
wayne
state
university
law
school
stated
although
creative
approaches
might
mitigate
effects
think
one
proposals
combination
proposals
reasonably
likely
result
admission
class
similar
higher
numbers
african
americans
latinos
native
americans
prior
policy
ibid
michigan
tells
different
story
asserts
although
statistics
difficult
track
number
underrepresented
minorities
entering
freshman
class
michigan
percentage
changed
little
tr
oral
arg
also
claims
statistics
california
across
campuses
university
california
system
show
today
underrepresented
minority
percentage
better
campuses
except
berkeley
california
equivalent
initiative
took
effect
turns
statistics
good
enough
wrong
reference
manual
scientific
evidence
ed
introduction
stephen
breyer
quoting
wolfgang
pauli
section
already
led
decreased
minority
enrollment
michigan
public
colleges
universities
took
effect
underrepresented
minorities
made
percent
university
michigan
freshman
class
compared
percent
roughly
percent
decline
see
university
michigan
new
freshman
enrollment
overview
office
registrar
online
http
http
moreover
total
number
underrepresented
minorities
michigan
increased
even
number
underrepresented
minorities
admitted
university
decreased
example
proportion
black
freshmen
among
enrolled
university
michigan
declined
percent
percent
even
though
proportion
black
persons
michigan
increased
percent
see
fessenden
keller
minorities
fared
affirmative
action
bans
times
june
online
http
university
michigan
black
recent
study
also
confirms
decreased
minority
degree
attainment
michigan
university
michigan
graduating
class
first
admitted
took
effect
quite
different
previous
classes
proportion
black
students
among
attaining
bachelor
degrees
percent
lowest
since
proportion
black
students
among
attaining
master
degrees
percent
lowest
since
proportion
black
students
among
attaining
doctoral
degrees
percent
lowest
since
proportion
black
students
among
attaining
professional
school
degrees
percent
lowest
since
see
kidder
restructuring
higher
education
opportunity
african
american
degree
attainment
michigan
ban
affirmative
action
online
http
president
chancellors
university
california
campuses
inform
us
abandonment
admissions
policies
resulted
immediate
precipitous
decline
rates
students
applied
admitted
enrolled
university
brief
president
chancellors
university
california
amici
curiae
hereinafter
president
chancellors
brief
university
california
los
angeles
ucla
example
admission
rates
underrepresented
minorities
plummeted
percent
california
ban
took
effect
percent
result
percentage
underrepresented
minorities
fell
half
percent
entering
class
percent
ibid
admissions
rate
underrepresented
minorities
ucla
reached
new
low
percent
see
brief
california
social
science
researchers
admissions
experts
amici
curiae
elimination
admissions
policies
california
especially
harmful
black
students
example
fewer
black
students
ucla
incoming
class
roughly
lowest
number
since
least
see
university
california
also
saw
declines
minority
representation
graduate
programs
professional
schools
underrepresented
minorities
made
percent
university
new
medical
students
actually
lower
rate
percent
reported
three
years
bakke
president
chancellors
brief
numbers
law
schools
even
alarming
underrepresented
minorities
made
percent
entering
law
students
well
percent
michigan
declines
minority
representation
university
california
come
even
minority
population
california
increased
ucla
example
proportion
hispanic
freshmen
among
enrolled
declined
percent
percent
even
though
proportion
hispanic
persons
california
increased
percent
percent
period
see
fessenden
keller
ucla
hispanic
proportion
black
freshmen
among
enrolled
ucla
declined
percent
percent
even
though
proportion
black
persons
california
increased
percent
percent
period
see
ibid
ucla
black
minority
admissions
rates
ucla
berkeley
decreased
number
minorities
enrolled
colleges
across
county
increased
see
phillips
colleges
straining
restore
diversity
bans
admissions
upend
racial
makeup
california
schools
wall
street
journal
mar
berkeley
president
chancellors
assure
us
tried
tell
us
notwithstanding
university
efforts
past
years
increase
diversity
university
california
campuses
use
initiatives
enrollment
rates
rebounded
kept
pace
demographic
changes
among
california
graduating
population
president
chancellors
brief
since
proposition
took
effect
university
spent
dollars
programs
policies
designed
increase
diversity
phillips
supra
still
unable
meet
diversity
goals
ibid
proposition
says
changed
character
university
ibid
quoting
associate
president
chief
policy
advisor
university
california
statistics
may
influence
views
colleagues
question
wisdom
adopting
admissions
policies
prefer
nation
colleges
universities
discard
policies
altogether
see
ante
roberts
concurring
suggesting
admissions
policies
might
harm
good
ante
scalia
concurring
judgment
grutter
thomas
concurring
part
dissenting
part
scalia
concurring
part
dissenting
part
view
odds
recognition
grutter
recently
fisher
university
texas
austin
admissions
policies
necessary
achieve
diverse
student
body
alternatives
failed
fundamentally
ignores
importance
diversity
institutions
higher
education
reveals
little
colleagues
understand
reality
race
america
recognized
diversity
education
paramount
good
reason
diversity
ensures
next
generation
moves
beyond
stereotypes
assumptions
superficial
perceptions
students
coming
communities
may
harbor
consciously
people
look
like
recognizing
need
diversity
acknowledges
ust
growing
particular
region
particular
professional
experiences
likely
affect
individual
views
one
unique
experience
racial
minority
society
like
race
unfortunately
still
matters
grutter
acknowledges
cultivate
set
leaders
legitimacy
eyes
citizenry
necessary
path
leadership
visibly
open
talented
qualified
individuals
every
race
ethnicity
colleges
universities
must
free
prioritize
goal
diversity
must
free
immerse
students
multiracial
environment
fosters
frequent
meaningful
interactions
students
races
thereby
pushes
students
transcend
assumptions
may
hold
basis
skin
color
without
admissions
policies
might
well
impossible
statistics
described
make
fact
glaringly
obvious
turn
blind
eye
something
help
see
clear
mean
suggest
virtues
adopting
admissions
policies
inform
legal
question
today
regarding
constitutionality
ignore
unfortunate
outcome
today
decision
short
amending
state
constitution
herculean
task
racial
minorities
michigan
deprived
even
opportunity
convince
michigan
public
colleges
universities
consider
race
admissions
plans
attempts
achieve
racial
diversity
proved
unworkable
institutions
unnecessarily
hobbled
pursuit
diverse
student
body
constitution
protect
racial
minorities
political
defeat
neither
give
majority
free
rein
erect
selective
barriers
racial
minorities
doctrine
polices
channels
change
ensure
majority
wins
without
rigging
rules
game
ensure
success
today
discards
doctrine
without
good
reason
permits
decision
majority
voters
michigan
strip
michigan
elected
university
boards
authority
make
decisions
respect
constitutionally
permissible
admissions
policies
preserving
boards
plenary
authority
make
educational
decisions
direct
sense
implicates
judiciary
special
role
safeguarding
interests
groups
relegated
position
political
powerlessness
command
extraordinary
protection
majoritarian
political
process
seattle
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
abdicates
role
permitting
majority
use
numerical
advantage
change
rules
forever
stack
deck
racial
minorities
michigan
result
michigan
public
colleges
universities
less
equipped
part
ensuring
students
races
better
prepare
increasingly
diverse
workforce
society
grutter
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
today
decision
eviscerates
important
strand
equal
protection
jurisprudence
members
historically
marginalized
groups
rely
federal
courts
protect
constitutional
rights
decision
hardly
bolster
hope
vision
democracy
preserves
right
participate
meaningfully
equally
respectfully
dissent
footnotes
justice
scalia
justice
sotomayor
question
relationship
washington
seattle
school
dist
parents
involved
community
schools
seattle
school
dist
see
post
scalia
concurring
judgment
post
sotomayor
dissenting
plurality
today
addresses
issue
explaining
action
parents
involved
unconstitutional
given
absence
showing
prior
de
jure
segregation
parents
involved
supra
majority
opinion
plurality
opinion
see
ante
today
plurality
notes
seattle
assumed
constitutionality
busing
remedy
issue
absent
finding
prior
de
jure
segregation
ante
quoting
seattle
supra
assumption
seattle
proceeded
constitute
finding
sufficient
justify
action
parents
involved
though
doubtless
pertinent
analyzing
seattle
held
parents
involved
seattle
school
board
purported
remedial
action
permissible
today
absent
showing
de
jure
segregation
must
understand
seattle
seattle
understood
ante
emphasis
added
footnotes
simplicity
sake
use
respondent
respondents
throughout
opinion
describe
parties
adverse
petitioner
eric
russell
respondent
supports
petitioner
plurality
cites
evidence
justice
breyer
dissent
parents
involved
community
schools
seattle
school
dist
suggest
city
partial
cause
segregation
problem
ante
plurality
parents
involved
criticized
dissent
relying
irrelevant
evidence
elid
ing
distinction
de
jure
de
facto
segregation
casually
intimat
ing
seattle
school
attendance
patterns
reflect
ed
illegal
segregation
today
plurality
sides
dissent
repeats
errors
assumed
see
appellants
challenge
propriety
student
assignments
purpose
achieving
integration
even
absent
finding
prior
de
jure
segregation
therefore
specifically
pass
issue
dissent
version
test
scattershot
since
according
dissent
doctrine
forbids
reconfigur
ing
political
process
manner
burdens
racial
minority
post
opinion
sotomayor
emphasis
added
must
reason
underlying
issue
issue
concerning
process
reconfigured
racial
policy
question
benefits
racial
minority
also
benefitted
persons
belonging
racial
majority
reconfiguration
burden
well
second
thought
issue
racial
policy
benefits
primarily
racial
minority
designed
purpose
post
standard
seattle
purported
apply
standard
affect
racial
issue
grutter
bollinger
admissions
policies
may
constitutionally
designed
purpose
seattle
supra
benefitting
primarily
racial
minorities
must
designed
purpose
achieving
educational
benefits
students
races
grutter
supra
dissent
must
mean
issue
racial
long
policy
question
incidental
effect
effect
flowing
design
benefiting
primarily
racial
minorities
many
members
particular
racial
group
must
take
position
issue
suppose
position
entire
group
interest
every
member
dissent
suggests
post
beyond
knows
five
percent
percent
dissent
proves
point
asserting
without
citation
though
many
others
races
deny
reality
affirmative
action
benefits
racial
minorities
post
dissent
suggests
throughout
post
view
reality
necessarily
shared
members
racial
minorities
must
favor
affirmative
action
dissent
contends
post
point
ignores
obvious
discrimination
individual
occurs
individual
membership
particular
group
ignore
obvious
dissent
misses
point
course
discrimination
group
constitutes
discrimination
member
group
since
persons
groups
protected
one
say
dissent
constitution
prohibits
discrimination
minority
groups
majority
groups
ackerman
beyond
carolene
products
harv
rev
things
equal
insularity
normally
source
enormous
bargaining
advantage
disadvantage
group
engaged
pluralist
american
politics
except
special
cases
concerns
underlie
carolene
lead
judges
protect
groups
possess
opposite
characteristic
ones
carolene
emphasizes
groups
diffuse
rather
insular
dissent
thinks
understand
argument
amending
michigan
constitution
violates
says
constitutionally
prescribed
activity
necessarily
part
state
existing
political
process
post
understand
argument
quite
well
see
quite
well
begs
question
michigan
action
unconstitutional
violates
violate
part
state
existing
political
process
part
state
existing
political
process
violates
according
dissent
fills
important
doctrinal
gap
left
open
washington
davis
since
rule
unique
among
principles
makes
clear
majority
may
alter
political
process
goal
prevent
ing
minority
groups
partaking
process
equal
footing
post
nonsense
gap
manipulate
ground
rules
post
ri
contest
post
order
harm
persons
race
deny
equal
protection
washington
davis
doubly
shameful
equate
majority
behind
majority
responsible
jim
crow
post
sotomayor
dissenting
footnotes
course
mean
suggest
michigan
voters
acted
anything
like
invidious
intent
see
infra
historically
stymied
rights
racial
minorities
contra
ante
scalia
concurring
judgment
like
earlier
chapters
political
restructuring
michigan
amendment
issue
case
changed
rules
political
process
disadvantage
minority
members
society
although
term
affirmative
action
commonly
used
describe
colleges
universities
use
race
crafting
admissions
policies
instead
use
term
admissions
policies
comprehend
term
affirmative
action
connoting
intentional
preferential
treatment
based
race
alone
example
use
quota
system
whereby
certain
proportion
seats
institution
incoming
class
must
set
aside
racial
minorities
use
points
system
whereby
institution
accords
fixed
numerical
advantage
applicant
race
admission
otherwise
unqualified
students
institution
solely
account
race
none
accurate
description
practices
public
universities
permitted
adopt
decision
grutter
bollinger
instructed
institutions
higher
education
consider
race
admissions
limited
way
effort
create
diverse
student
body
comport
grutter
colleges
universities
must
use
race
flexibly
must
maintain
quota
ibid
even
limited
sensitivity
race
must
limited
time
must
employed
serious
good
faith
consideration
workable
alternatives
admissions
plans
like
ones
place
michigan
institutions
thus
far
cry
affirmative
action
plans
confer
preferential
treatment
intentionally
solely
basis
race
crawford
confronted
amendment
california
constitution
prohibiting
state
courts
mandating
pupil
assignments
unless
federal
required
equal
protection
clause
upheld
amendment
nothing
repeal
existing
legislation
standard
previously
required
california
went
beyond
federally
required
amendment
merely
moved
standard
back
federal
baseline
distinguished
amendment
one
seattle
left
rules
political
game
unchanged
racial
minorities
crawford
unlike
racial
minorities
seattle
still
appeal
local
school
districts
relief
crawford
distinguished
hunter
erickson
clarifying
charter
amendment
hunter
something
mere
repeal
altered
framework
political
process
seattle
drew
distinction
held
initiative
work
ed
something
repeal
desegregation
law
political
entity
created
justice
scalia
accuses
crafting
version
versions
prong
see
ante
opinion
concurring
judgment
simply
apply
test
announced
seattle
whether
policy
question
inures
primarily
benefit
minority
justice
scalia
ignores
analysis
see
part
supra
instead
purports
identify
three
versions
test
thinks
opinion
advances
first
whether
policy
question
benefits
racial
minority
ante
quoting
supra
misunderstands
doctrine
misquotes
opinion
prong
never
required
policy
benefit
minority
group
sentence
justice
scalia
appears
quote
makes
altogether
different
point
doctrine
obviously
implicated
first
place
restructuring
burdens
members
society
equally
second
prong
doctrine
see
supra
explaining
doctrine
implicated
hen
majority
reconfigures
political
process
manner
burdens
racial
minority
second
version
asks
whether
policy
benefits
primarily
racial
minority
ante
one
articulated
seattle
explained
see
supra
page
easily
met
case
third
whether
policy
incidental
effect
benefitting
racial
minorities
ante
test
advance
stripping
governing
boards
authority
decide
whether
adopt
admissions
policies
majority
removed
decision
bodies
well
suited
make
decision
boards
engaged
arguments
sides
matter
deliberate
make
refine
considered
judgment
racial
diversity
admissions
policies
see
grutter
kennedy
dissenting
face
overwhelming
evidence
justice
scalia
claims
actually
easier
harder
minorities
effectuate
change
constitutional
amendment
level
board
level
see
ante
opinion
concurring
judgment
voting
favorable
board
eight
members
three
major
public
universities
requires
electing
majority
vote
least
different
candidates
several
running
different
election
cycles
claim
minimizes
difficult
amend
state
constitution
see
supra
also
incorrect
premise
minorities
must
elect
entirely
new
slate
board
members
order
effectuate
change
board
level
justice
scalia
overlooks
fact
minorities
need
elect
new
board
members
order
effect
change
may
instead
seek
persuade
existing
board
members
adopt
changes
interests
take
position
justice
scalia
asserts
process
amending
michigan
constitution
part
michigan
existing
political
process
see
ante
opinion
concurring
judgment
clearly
problem
amending
michigan
constitution
simply
part
state
political
process
ante
reconfigured
political
process
michigan
difficult
racial
minorities
racial
minorities
alone
achieve
legislation
interest
section
elevated
issue
admissions
policies
kinds
admissions
policies
higher
plane
existing
political
process
michigan
constitutional
amendment
certainly
fair
assume
voters
may
supported
hunter
amendment
discriminatory
animus
others
may
motivated
strong
beliefs
freedom
contract
freedom
alienate
property
similarly
although
michiganders
may
voted
racial
animus
may
acting
personal
belief
like
colleagues
today
using
admissions
policies
higher
education
unwise
presence
absence
invidious
discrimination
place
current
analysis
purpose
doctrine
operates
irrespective
discriminatory
intent
protects
right
plurality
relies
justice
breyer
dissent
parents
involved
conclude
one
permissible
reading
record
school
board
maintained
policies
perpetuate
racial
segregation
schools
ante
remarkably
members
today
plurality
criticized
justice
breyer
reading
record
parents
involved
see
bylaws
university
michigan
board
regents
ny
delegations
authority
made
time
time
time
board
member
university
staff
unit
university
may
revoked
board
time
notice
revocation
shall
given
writing
bylaws
online
http
attempts
majority
make
difficult
minority
exercise
right
vote
sadly
thing
past
see
shelby
county
holder
slip
ginsburg
dissenting
describing
recent
examples
discriminatory
changes
state
voting
laws
including
dual
voter
registration
system
mississippi
disfranchise
black
voters
redistricting
plan
georgia
decrease
black
voting
strength
proposal
change
voting
mechanism
school
board
elections
south
carolina
decision
last
term
shelby
county
preclearance
requirement
voting
rights
act
blocked
many
discriminatory
changes
voting
procedures
preserving
right
participate
meaningfully
equally
process
government
especially
important
respect
education
policy
mean
suggest
constitutionality
laws
forbidding
racial
preferences
depends
policy
interest
stake
ante
plurality
opinion
note
long
recognized
foundation
good
citizenship
grutter
quoting
brown
board
education
nation
colleges
universities
represent
training
ground
large
number
nation
leaders
special
reason
safeguard
guarantee
public
institutions
open
available
segments
american
society
including
people
races
ethnicities
invalidated
amendment
basis
lacked
rational
relationship
legitimate
end
concluded
amendment
impose
broad
undifferentiated
disability
single
named
group
discontinuous
reasons
offered
seem
ed
inexplicable
anything
animus
toward
class
affect
ed
romer
plurality
raises
another
concern
respect
precedent
points
decisions
california
appeals
ninth
circuit
upholding
constitutional
proposition
california
constitutional
amendment
identical
substance
ante
plurality
notes
affirm
lower
decision
case
holdings
invalidated
ibid
fail
see
significance
routinely
resolve
conflicts
lower
courts
necessary
result
course
decisions
courts
one
side
debate
invalidated
called
question
unaware
single
instance
inevitable
fact
influenced
decision
one
way
lower
courts
proceeded
opposite
fashion
california
ninth
circuit
invalidated
proposition
sixth
circuit
upheld
plurality
come
way
law
school
graduated
black
students
class
first
latino
student
history
app
grutter
bollinger
graduated
first
native
american
student
ibid
whole
law
school
graduated
black
students
compared
previous
decade
along
latino
students
ibid
percentages
include
enrollment
statistics
black
students
hispanic
students
native
american
students
students
identify
members
two
underrepresented
minority
groups
chart
reproduced
fessenden
keller
minorities
fared
affirmative
action
bans
times
june
online
http
ibid
ibid
chart
reproduced
phillips
colleges
straining
restore
diversity
bans
admissions
upend
racial
makeup
california
schools
wall
street
journal
mar