I did not read the case and might not ever. There are lots of dissents and concurrences. Some are longer than the opinion. Judge NAP does his best at making this concise. I do not know what this means going forward. I imagine this mostly changes the law of the land for future law suits.Race can be considered only if it passes "strict scrutiny."
It was 6-3 with the 3 minority liberals dissenting. The most recent justice wrote a critical race theory dissent, saying America was racist etc.
BTW I recall California outlawed affirmative action in the state systems. As a result, a FOIA action, revealed that Hispanics and blacks had a higher graduation rate and shorter time to graduate. What happens with affirmative action is blacks get accepted at a school where they are not prepared and dumber than a vast majority. Harvard Law does not fail students and likely does not reveal class standing so that is a win for the student as their diploma says Harvard. In other cases the students fail classes and even drop out and feel inferior. I saw the drop out rate for blacks at MIT once and almost wept. I cannot recall what it was but it was high. The would have graduated at a university a rung or two lower down.
Harvard weights personal interviews where Asians are found to have inferior personalities than blacks. Yes, really. So 20% Asians. Cal Tech does not so 40% Asians.
At 3:40
https://youtu.be/8Mfgf0QI9iQ?t=217 Affirmative Action Rejected by Supreme Court! Live Analysis
Judge Napolitano
