Skip to main content
Unpublished Paper
Justice Sotomayor's Undemocratic Dissent in Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action
ExpressO (2014)
  • Adam Lamparello
Abstract

There are compelling reasons to support affirmative action programs. The effects of racial discrimination, and racism itself, remain prevalent throughout the country. Pretending otherwise would be to ignore reality. Arguing that the equal protection clause compels a state to implement race-based affirmative action programs, however, would make a mockery of the Constitution. Former Supreme Court Justice Hughes famously stated, “at the constitutional level where we work, 90 percent of any decision is emotional.” The remaining 10 percent is “[t]he rational part … [that] supplies the reasons for supporting our predilections.” It is time for this type of judging to end. Good intentions do not make good decisions, just like good results do not necessarily lead to good outcomes. The best outcomes are those that result from fair—and constitutional—processes. After all, “[i]t is a sordid business, this divvying us up by race.” If we keep dividing, the country will never be united.

Keywords
  • constitutional law,
  • fourteenth amendment,
  • equal protection,
  • schuette v. coalition to defend affirmative action,
  • originalism
Publication Date
May 5, 2014
Citation Information
Adam Lamparello. "Justice Sotomayor's Undemocratic Dissent in Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action" ExpressO (2014)
Available at: http://works.bepress.com/adam_lamparello/19/