Larry Purdy, one of the lawyers who worked on the Gratz and Grutter cases, writes here about the absurd Sixth Circuit decision.
Many years ago when I was in law school, I was disabused of the notion that judges always look objectively at the written law in formulating their views on cases. I forget the precise case, but one of the Supreme Court justices is said to have told his law clerk, “I know how I want this to turn out; now find me a justification.” This seems like the same thing. Two judges who feel compelled to support “affirmative action” had to come up with some rationale for overturning a law saying “no” to racial preferences, so they devised a Rube Goldberg of an opinion to make the Fourteenth Amendment say the opposite of what it says.
I reviewed Purdy’s book Getting Under the Skin of Diversity here.