PLF and CEO model brief on racial contracting preferences
About seven years ago, then PLF attorney Sharon Browne co-drafted a model brief with Roger Clegg of the Center for Equal Opportunity. The model brief is intended to be used by attorneys looking to challenge government policies that require race-based contracting preferences. In the two decades since the Supreme Court last ruled on the constitutionality of contracting preferences, there has been many differing opinions in the courts of appeals and state supreme courts concerning their continued legality.
After PLF unveiled its new website in September, that model brief was unwittingly taken down. However, I’ve received a number of inquiries asking for it, so I wanted to reintroduce it here on the Liberty Blog. You can find it here. Hopefully attorneys around the country will continue to find it helpful in drafting briefs that challenge the government’s use of race when awarding public contracts. And maybe, in a couple of years, we’ll have that next Supreme Court case that will finally bring needed clarity to this area of the law.
What to read next
ReasonTV released a new video that showcases our client Peggy Fontenot and her case against the Attorney General of Oklahoma. If you’ll recall, last year, Oklahoma enacted a new law that limits who may market art as American Indian-made.
Justice Don Willett of the Texas Supreme Court endured the partisan gauntlet of the Senate hearing on his nomination to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. The hearing only confirmed what has been known for some time: Justice Willett will serve the federal judiciary with integrity, wit, and commitment.
Earlier this year, the City of Seattle shocked the people of Washington—indeed, many across the nation—when it decided to impose an income tax on so-called “high-earners” in direct defiance of the Washington State Supreme Court, which has repeatedly held that the state constitution’s uniformity clause prohibits targeted income taxes.
PLF and several allied organizations submitted a petition for rule-making to the federal agencies that administer the Endangered Species Act. The petition asks the agencies to define “species” and “subspecies,” terms which, although critical to the Act’s operation, are left undefined by statute and regulation.
Next Friday, I’ll be presenting oral argument in the Ninth Circuit in Cedar Point Nursery v. Gould. The case involves a challenge to the ALRB’s access regulation, which allows union organizers to use the private property of agricultural employers to solicit potential union members.