Justice Breyer’s Concurrence in Schuette

Fascinating opinion, in that Breyer clearly does not care for Michigan’s prohibition on racial preferences in university admissions but felt bound by the principle that local and state governments ought to be free to experiment on this issue.

You may also like...

4 Responses

  1. Joe says:

    Breyer supports the political process precedents that the plurality wishes to weaken somewhat and Scalia/Thomas wishes to overrule. But, he argues that they do not really apply here, since unelected university officials make the ultimate decisions. In an extended discussion that he simply doesn’t substantively address, Sotomayor challenges this.

    I respect, if not necessarily agree with Breyer’s opinion, but this aspect of it is disappointing.

    • PrometheeFeu says:

      Is there a summary of the Sotomayor dissent that you like? This case seemed particularly easy to me and so I have trouble understanding where the dissent is coming from.

  2. John Dereszewski says:

    I believe that Breyer saw the question much as he did the issue involving the steps taken by the Seattle school board to combat the re-segregation of the schools that the court – over his dissent – threw out several terms ago. In both situations, he believes the equal protection clause permits the democratic process to decide the questions. This was the main point that he wished to make.

    By the way, his attempt to distinguish the political process cases was particularly lame and was easily demolished by the dissent. In the least, Hunter could easily have been distinguished by the facts of the case.

  3. It is disappointing, this aspect of Breyer’s opinion, but I respect it.