Season 3, Episode 32 (Show 136): The Legacy of the Harvard Case – Special Guest Jeffrey Brenzel
August 2, 2023
The shock waves from the affirmative action opinion continue to propagate, and former admissions Dean Jeffrey Brenzel joins us with a look at legacy and donor admissions and other policies implicated by these developments.
We return to the affirmative action case, and again former Yale Dean of Undergraduate Admissions, Jeffrey Brenzel, joins us with his peerless expertise. The fallout of the opinion is enormous ,and we address some of its ramifications, including legacy admissions, donor admissions, private vs. public institutional options, admissions departments’ responses, and much more. What about the new frontiers of litigation that seem to be emerging, from scholarships designed to address racial disparities to non-race-conscious policies that nevertheless have impact on racial makeup? Former Dean Brenzel also offers a fascinating critique of the likely responses, showing how what might seem like a powerful response might actually be a foolish way to avoid real impact.
Show Notes:
Season 3, Episode 31 (Show 135): Amara Culpa, Amara Bene
July 26, 2023
Professor Amar looks at his own words, both on this podcast and elsewhere; his mistakes and his wisdom each teach us something.
What’s in a name? This week, our podcast title means (sort of) “Amar was wrong – Amar was right.” Two weeks ago we said “bigots” and many made much of that. So we take the feedback seriously and revisit it – you can judge the result. Meanwhile, news from Long Island brings the 4th amendment to the fore again, and in a somewhat different way. Different – how? Listen and find out how to create a better jurisprudence without amending the Constitution, and the real differences in the lives of the people this would make. Finally, Akhil has a new article in the popular press, and we introduce that for later elaboration.
Show Notes:
Season 3, Episode 30 (Show 134): Scrutinizing Affirmative Action – Special Guest Jeffrey Brenzel
July 19, 2023
Affirmative action takes the stage as the Court strikes down, in essence, the framework it had reluctantly and fitfully constructed over the past 50 years. We bring an expert on board to help us help you decipher it – Jeff Brenzel, former Dean of Undergraduate Admissions at Yale.
It’s time to discuss the Affirmative Action cases from Harvard and the University of North Carolina, and we have brought in an expert on college admissions – Jeff Brenzel, the former Dean of Undergraduate Admissions at Yale. Jeff is so much more than that – he has taught at Yale as a lecturer in philosophy and humanities; is the former head of the Alumni Association, and is a current trustee at Morehouse College, to name some of his many hats. He offers a perspective that is a perfect supplement to the legal analysis from Professor Amar, as we make our way through 237 pages of Supreme Court opinion, concurrences, and fiery dissents, not to mention Akhil’s scholarship on this subject over the decades. It’s potentially a morass and we begin to find our way through it, to hopefully understand the stormy present and the uncertain future of college admissions.
Show Notes:
Season 3, Episode 29 (Show 133): The Rights of Bigots
July 12, 2023
When a website designer claims the right to turn away a gay couple who requests a wedding website, Colorado takes umbrage, the Supreme Court weights in, and we analyze.
A Colorado website designer refuses to create sites for gay couples’ weddings, going afoul of Colorado’s public accommodations law. Can she be compelled to author such a site? The Court has ruled, and we have the analysis. Along the way, we find ourselves discussing the intricacies of stipulations, and getting into the fine points of how one gets to federal court, even as we consider more mainstream questions as speech vs. conduct, the limits of rights, and some interesting hypotheticals. Professor Amar, as usual, has his own take on such things.
Show Notes:
Season 3, Episode 28 (Show 132): No Moore ISL
July 4, 2023
The opinion and the decision are in on Moore v. Harper, and the fate of ISL has been determined. We provide an in-depth analysis of the opinion, the case, and the impact.
The Supreme Court has ruled in the Independent State Legislature case, Moore v. Harper. As we have from the beginning, we look at the case from the point of view of the precedents, of the history, the constitutional issues and implications, and the inner dynamics of the Court and beyond. As an author in a key amicus brief, Professor Amar is on the inside, and now so are you, as we take the opinion apart and explain the sometimes confusing matter of why the case was not rendered moot by later developments – and we look at the strange split among the various advocates on this question. We compare Chief Justice Roberts’ reasoning with our own from our brief, and look at the importance of a concurrence. At the end of the day, and of this podcast, you will come away with a thorough understanding of what could have been a disaster for the country but instead is a fine hour for the Court.
Show Notes:
Season 3, Episode 27 (Show 131): Four Clauses, Two Juries
June 28, 2023
As Moore v. Harper is released, and we digest it in preparation for a forthcoming podcast, last week’s Samia v. US opinion is explained and placed in perspective.
It’s Supreme Court opinion season, and just before this week’s upload came the happy news of the Moore v. Harper decision. We’ll be back with details on that soon enough, of course. Prior to that, however, the Court issued some fascinating decisions last week, including in the case of Samia v. United States. This confrontation clause/Sixth Amendment case happens to hit one of Professor Amar’s many sweet spots; he has written on the subject in numerous forums over years and is a true expert. You will have a complex set of facts made legible, and a confusing set of key constitutional principles sculpted into an elegant formulation.