Season 2, Episode 47 (Show 99): Double Negative Action

November 16, 2022

The Supreme Court heard oral arguments in two affirmative action cases.  We dissect the arguments, airing actual clips from the arguments and offering our commentary.

Affirmative action is before the Supreme Court, and two cases – one involving Harvard, and one implicating the University of North Carolina – were recently argued before the Court.  We have pulled out clips from the more than six hours of argument, culled the main lines of reasoning from both sides, and we present them to you.  Listen to the voices of the justices and the advocates, and hear Akhil’s commentary and analysis.  This is the first of a planned two-podcast series.

Show Notes:

Bakke's Fate (1996)

Professor Amar and then-judicial-clerk Neal Katyal published this important article on affirmative action as it hung by a thread before the Court in 1996. It appeared in the UCLA Law Review, 1745 (1996).  Now, after the Court declared that in 25 years, affirmative action would likely be gone, it sits before the Court again.

Read and/or Download

Regents Of The University Of California v. Bakke (1978)

The Bakke case, setting diversity rather than reparation as the basis for affirmative action.  University of California Regents v. Bakke, 438 U.S. 265 (1978).

Read and/or Download

Grutter v. Bollinger Et Al. (2003)

The Grutter case.  The case most frequently cited as the relevant precedent in the current cases. Grutter v. Bollinger et al., 539 U.S. 306 (2003).

Read and/or Download

14th Annual Rosenkranz Debate, with Professor Amar

The Rosenkranz Debate, between Professor Amar and Professor John Yoo, held at the recent FedSoc Lawyers Convention.  The topic?  Moore v. Harper, or Independent State Legislature (ISL) “theory.”

Click to visit site with debate video