Press "Enter" to skip to content

Opinion In Harvard admissions case, will justices cherry-pick their history?

David Gergen: Supreme Court term that just concluded was a disaster, brace yourself for the next one. He says the conservative justices seem poised to overturn decades of precedent letting colleges consider diversity as a factor when admitting students. But a spate of briefs defending Harvard and UNC offer compelling arguments that should give the conservative majority pause, he says. Gergen says the court's recent rulings expanding gun rights and eliminating constitutional protection for abortion seem more assured than was the overturning of Roe v. Wade. The legal landscape is clear, if contested, Gergen writes, but it's clear that the current conservative majority will vote to uphold the programs now in place, not to strike them down, not strike them, he writes. He asks: What does history tell the justices?

John Sutter: Conservative justices cherry-pick the version of history most helpful to their cause. Sutter says the Framers of the Fourteenth Amendment rejected proposals to prohibit any and all use of racial classifications by the government. Students for Fair Admissions group that brought the lawsuits makes almost no reference to history, he says.