Law Commons^™

Unmuting The Volume: Fisher, Affirmative Action Jurisprudence, And The Legacy Of Racial Silence, Mae Kuykendall, Charles Adside Iii

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

As typified by its recent decisions in Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin and Shelby County v. Holder, the Supreme Court’s jurisprudence concerning race has long imposed strict judicial oversight over any use of race for the formulation of public policy. This top-down approach has invited various undesirable outcomes, the most pernicious of which are the endorsement of silence on the subject of race and the delegitimizing of most public deliberations about race by non-Court actors. Consequently, speech within universities and other learning environments regarding race has become a psychologically challenging risk for both students and faculty, who justifiably …

Bakke To The Wall: The Crisis Of Bakkean Diversity, Gabriel J. Chin

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

In the years since the United States Supreme Court's affirmative action holding in Board of Regents v. Bakke, many educational institutions have struggled to apply Bakke's doctrine to their admissions policymaking. Professor Chin asserts that Bakke is incoherent because it does not explain whether the diversity it tries to foster is cultural or racial. Furthermore, he argues that neither a racial nor a cultural basis works under the Bakke scheme, leading to the difficulties schools confront in framing an affirmative action program.

Focusing on law school admissions policies, Professor Chin argues that because of Bakke's weakness as law, it is …