Surprise, surprise: California Attorney General urges Supreme Court to uphold disparate impact
Sadly, we’re not surprised by this news. The California Attorney General filed a brief in support of racial preferences in Fisher. The California AG filed a brief in favor of the constitutionality of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act in Shelby County. The California AG filed a brief against the constitutionality of Proposal 2 in Schuette. And now, the California AG files a brief in support of disparate impact in Mount Holly. If there is ever a chance to stereotype and classify individuals on the basis of race, you can rest assured that the California Attorney General will support it 100%. Fortunately for us defenders of equality under the law, the Supreme Court has ruled in favor of equality under the law and against the AG in each of those cases. As PLF made clear in its brief, Mount Holly (and Schuette) should be no exception.
What to read next
PLF asks the U.S. Supreme Court to rule that there is no “legislative exception” to the unconstitutional conditions doctrine
It seems that some governments and courts prefer to treat Supreme Court precedent as an option, rather than a requirement. The Supreme Court has ruled—twice—that it’s unconstitutional for government to … ›