Redistricting case

[Conkle, Daniel O.]

The NY Times ran articles full of speculation on Thurs. and Fri. -- that she
wanted to soften the Court's decision in Bush v. Gore (argued the same week)
by avoiding a decision that might to seen to disfavor African-Americans
and/or that her view of affirmative action may be changing, perhaps in part
because the Republican party, e.g., in Bush's cabinet picks, has openly
embraced a form of affirmative action (see the earlier thread on that
topic), etc., etc.  The articles were interesting, but, frankly, I found
none of the speculation particularly persuasive or explanatory.

Dan Conkle
**********************************
Daniel O. Conkle
Professor of Law
Indiana University School of Law
Bloomington, Indiana  47405
(812) 855-4331
fax (812) 855-0555
e-mail conkle at indiana.edu
**********************************

-----Original Message-----
From: Daniel Hoffman [mailto:guayiya at BELLSOUTH.NET]
Sent: Saturday, April 21, 2001 11:13 AM
To: CONLAWPROF at LISTSERV.UCLA.EDU
Subject: Re: Redistricting case


Can anyone explain O'Connor's vote in Easley v. Cromartie, the new
decision out of North Carolina?

Daniel Hoffman