No subject

[Frank Cross]

I can't imagine the constitutional attack on the 10% plan.  To argue that a
plan is any sort of affirmative action, legal or illegal, you've got to
have a baseline to compare it against.  The 10% plan looks like affirmative
action only if you assume a baseline of SAT scores.  Would anyone
constitutionalize SAT scores as the necessary standard for college
admissions?  The 10% plan is neutral on its face and obviously related to
the criteria for college admissions.  It has the effect of increasing
minority enrollments only vis a vis reliance on SATs.


At 08:57 AM 6/23/2000 -0400, you wrote:
>With respect to Texas's post-Hopwood 10% plan, one possibility, explored
in great detail in a paper by Kim Forde-Mazrui of Virginia, is that the
plan is indeed subject to strict scrutiny but satisfies the explicit
"strict in theory but not fatal in fact" standard stated in Adarand.
>
>Mark Tushnet
>Georgetown University Law Center
>600 New Jersey Ave. NW
>Washington, DC  20001
>     202-662-9106
>     202-662-9497 (fax)
>tushnet at law.georgetown.edu
>
Frank Cross
Herbert D. Kelleher Centennial Professor of Business Law
CBA 5.202
University of Texas at Austin
Austin, TX 78712