And While We’re Arguing Legal Opinions…

The record was undisputed that it was Harvard that was pitting racial minorities against one another. That’s why Harvard lost. https://t.co/41ywheFqhN

— George Conway (@gtconway3d) July 2, 2023

....without the burden of studying the case law or the opinions:

A) Can you identify where in the majority opinion they make that an explicit basis for the result? (Just because it was in the record doesn’t mean the court found it dispositive.)

B) Accepting that fact claim arguendo, what is the legal argument for Harvard’s actions as alleged necessitating the end of affirmative action in college admissions?

(I’m going to spare you the discussion of standing and Creative 303 George is hosting at his Twitter feed. You’re welcome.)

(Although there are STILL some who haven’t read that case:

1. Religious criteria not relevant to 303; question is whether expressive. 2. Under 303, definitely expressive. But this is irrelevant b/c only reason issue in 303 is CO public accommodation law. It doesn’t cover stuff like these so artist is free to reject without concern.

— Greg Chernack, CEO, Four Seasons Total Landscaping (@GChernack) July 2, 2023

1 is correct. 2 is dead wrong. Most of the dissent in Creative 303 is spent shredding that argument, based on precedent, like a paper shredder. It’s entertaining, if your inclinations run that way.)