Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
The Supreme Court ended its most recent term with a bang, and that’s also how Professors Richard Epstein and John Yoo are starting this review of the biggest decisions. There’s a split in the faculty lounge over the wisdom of the Court’s affirmative action ruling and we’ll let you decide who gets the better of the argument. Then we move on to the Court’s smackdown of the Biden Administration’s student loan relief plan and the latest in a long string of cases regarding how and whether free speech rights apply in an anti-discrimination context (yes, it’s Colorado … again). Finally, because we don’t want you to think Law Talk has lost its edge we tee up the most important legal question of 2023: Can a bear violate your Fourth Amendment rights?
Subscribe to Law Talk With Epstein, Yoo & Senik in Apple Podcasts (and leave a 5-star review, please!), or by RSS feed. For all our podcasts in one place, subscribe to the Ricochet Audio Network Superfeed in Apple Podcasts or by RSS feed.
That was fascinating. When Richard said something to the effect that the college administrators were wildly out-of-step with a large majority of the general public I was practically shouting at my radio, “yeah, and now it’s time for the administrators to get with the program!” But then Richard appeared to walk that back, and ended up agreeing with John. That may be the first time I’ve ever heard him do that during a podcast.
The argument that there should always be a third way because the right way is too disruptive I understand, but it irritates me. When a wrong is in practice for so long, a) that causes disruption of its own, and b) ending it is inevitably going to cause further disruption. Sometimes there’s no way to smooth it out. I’d rather have this disruption than to prolong the unconstitutional status quo.
I was surprised at Richard’s stance on the affirmative action ruling. He’s afraid that there is going to be a backlash against a ruling that’s actually very popular with the public?
I realize that elites that sharply disagree with the hoi polloi, even in a democracy, can do a lot to obstruct. And it will happen with college administrators versus this ruling. I saw something similar with Brexit in the UK.
I think that whatever backlash results from the ruling, it will still stick. But I say this as someone who has made optimistic predictions before and been wrong.
For example, I keep hearing how progressives are intellectually bankrupt. They’ve run out of ideas, etc. They’re going to fall soon.
But they get worse, and their politicians still get re-elected.
Yeah, the polls show that affirmative action is one of those 70% issues. It got voted down in California in 2020.
Always one of my favorite podcasts, and this month was no exception.
They did make a good point that colleges like Harvard could double they enrollment. They clearly have enough money to do such things.
More non-Asians and non-Jews will just have to go to public schools and lesser private schools. Why is that so terrible?
There are historically black colleges and universities. Perhaps these places need to have their enrollment enlarged too.
I did enjoy the crack that the elitist universities will now get to act like the corrupt and twisted Southern racists after Brown v. Board of Education.
I have a hard time getting excited about college admissions by private schools. The only reason this becomes an issue is because Harvard accepts federal funding at least indirectly and probably directly as well. I’ve read assertions, when the subject of student loan payments by Ivy League graduates comes up, that Harvard and other top private schools have large endowments and could afford to give scholarships to each of their students.
So why is Harvard accepting federal funding? This whole case would be moot if Harvard didn’t. Title IX would not apply to them.
Why are we (the various federal and state governments) funding any private school? At all?
A lot of small private schools, in today’s declining population are having problems staying open, and losing government funding would hasten that. But not Harvard.
What Harvard has been doing is wrong. But is it really a compelling state interest? John Yoo is a Harvard graduate (jokingly called the last Asian graduate). But what if John was not allowed to get in because he’s Asian? Would he have been prevented from being a successful lawyer? He seems pretty smart and capable. Maybe he wouldn’t have gotten that Supreme Court clerkship and job in the Bush Administration. He still would have had the opportunity to have had a rewarding career in the law. He kind of reeks of ability, so having to go to a school with a slightly lesser reputation, or even a state school wouldn’t have stopped him.
I can’t get excited about how Harvard admits people. But I sure can get on board with not funding any private school whether it be Harvard or Hillsdale (an institution who makes a point not to accept government funding).