English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Zendy Plus

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Zendy Tools

Zendy Open

Class-based affirmative action preferences have recently received a great deal of popular support from scholars and legislators, and perhaps even the implicit approval of the Supreme Court. However, the rationale of the recent redistricting cases challenges the viability of such preferences. Those cases extend the principle against subterfuge, familiar in antidiscrimination law, into the affirmative action context. Thus, any affirmative action scheme is recast as an overt racial classification upon a showing of racially motivated intent."' Although the Court is probably ultimately unwilling to declare all affirmative action unconstitutional," it will have to recognize that class-based preferences that violate the principle against subterfuge are an unconstitutional alternative to the race-based preferences it is presently denouncing.

Class-Based Preferences in Affirmative Action Programs after Miller v Johnson: A Race-Neutral Option, or Subterfuge?