UCLR Online
The widespread, controversial protests against racial injustice that began in the spring of 2020 offer hope that U.S. culture may be evolving to a more sophisticated conception of racial equality.
In An Intersectional Critique of Tiers of Scrutiny, Professors Devon Carbado and Kimberlé Crenshaw infuse affirmative action with an overdue dose of intersectionality theory. Their intervention exposes equality law as an unmarked intersectional project that “privileges the intersectional identities of white antidiscrimination claimants.”
At the same time that a national racial reckoning has galvanized students to press higher education institutions (HEIs) to face up to their legacies of racism and commit to antiracism, courts are considering arguments for prohibiting consideration of race in admissions decisions.
For all of the legal and political contention surrounding affirmative action, one facet of the discussion is characterized by a curious, if implicit, consensus that spans all manner of ideological and partisan divisions.
A core ideal of Anglo-American law is that legal wrongs should be remedied by restoring the injured victim to the “rightful position.”
What’s still interesting is that the affirmative-action wars reflect larger issues, such as the betrayed promise of the civil-rights legislation and the Fourteenth Amendment guarantee of equal protection as well as the dishonesty, denial, and dysfunction surrounding questions of racial justice more generally.
Affirmative action in college admissions for underrepresented minorities provokes strong emotions. These strong emotions are guided by two competing principles.
Acentral concern with the rise of artificial intelligence (AI) systems is bias.
On June 11, 2020, the Hertz Corporation introduced a new strategy for bankruptcy financing.
In the 1950s, American corporate executives were overwhelmingly white, male, and valued progression within well-defined hierarchies over creativity.
High-skilled labor shortages threaten the United States’ ability to compete internationally with both adversaries and allies in major industries, such as manufacturing and high technology.
This is the second Essay in a two-part series exploring Chief Justice John Marshall’s private and public relationship to slavery.