View this debate of The organization “Intelligence Squared” about the meaning of the equal protection clause and racial preferences in higher education
Please read the pdf file containing excerpts from the Bakke case.
The use of racial preferences in higher education is once again before the Supreme Court in Fisher v. University of Texas, Austin. The organization “Intelligence Squared” recently hosted a debate about the meaning of the equal protection clause and racial preferences in higher education (url below). View this debate (apx. 140 minutes) and then critically evaluate the competing arguments. Questions or themes that you might consider include:

(1) The moderators begin with a distinction between “good public policy” and “constitutionally permissible” policy. What is this distinction about? How does it matter in the debate? Does the distinction really hold up?

(2) What is the strongest point on each side of the argument, and why?

(3) How do precedent and the language of the law figure into this conversation/debate? Do legal ideas, concepts, and categories narrow the terms of the conversation? If so, how? Do they organize the conversation and make the debate more rational and thoughtful than it might otherwise be?

(4) Which side has the better argument and why? You are free to make use of any materials and materials (e.g., Bakke, Croson, Adarand, Grutter, Parents Involved, the excerpts from LBJ’s speech, McWhorter) to help you formulate a response.

For a custom paper on the above topic or any other topic, place your order now!

What Awaits you:

• On-time delivery guarantee

• Masters and PhD-level writers

• Automatic plagiarism check

• 100% Privacy and Confidentiality

• High Quality custom-written papers
find the cost of your paper
Is this question part of your assignment?
Place order
Posted on May 2, 2016Author TutorCategories Question, Questions