Question: In a concurring opinion Justice Scalia said that race classifications
In a concurring opinion, Justice Scalia said that race classifications by government were never legitimate. In dissenting opinions, Justices Stevens, Souter, and Ginsburg argued that race-conscious remedies were justified. What were their arguments? With whom do you agree? Why?
Answer to relevant QuestionsWho were the most important stakeholders of the nineteenth-century fur industry? Were they treated responsibly by the standards of the day? By the standards of today?Did strategies of Standard Oil encourage unethical behavior? Could Rockefeller’s vision have been fulfilled using “nicer” tactics?How well did GE comply with the “General Principles of Corporate Social Responsibility” set forth in the section of that title in the chapter?Following Adarand v. Peña, the district court held that the affirmative action program in federal highway contracts was unconstitutional. Do you agree with this decision? Why or why not?Were the leak investigations overseen by Patricia Dunn useful and important? Were they ethical?
Post your question