General information page about CIR's two lawsuits
challenging racial preferences at the University of Michigan
«You are speaking in absolutes, and it isn't quite that,» Justice Sandra Day O'Connor said to Kirk O. Kolbo, the lawyer representing white applicants who
challenged racial preferences in the University...
Not exact matches
After the Supreme Court upheld some forms of race - conscious affirmative action in 2003, UT - Austin quickly reinstated
racial preferences in admissions, triggering a
challenge that led to the Supreme Court's most recent affirmative - action case.
CIR filed an amicus brief in a 2012 case
challenging California's Prop. 209 on the grounds that a state constitutional amendment barring the use of
racial preferences was itself illegal
racial discrimination.
These cases include the recent constitutional
challenge to the Affordable Care Act and the decisions invalidating Sarbanes - Oxley's accounting board, preventing the Justice Department from obtaining monetary relief against the tobacco industry under RICO, overturning the federal government's plan to statistically adjust the census, limiting the Justice Department's ability to create «majority - minority» districts, and upholding Proposition 209's ban on
racial preferences in California