While I disagree that this (reverse discrimination) is a serious problem that needs to be dealt with by the Supreme Court, the lower courts’ reasoning that this ruling threw out was pretty stupid. Essentially they said the person doing the discriminating must also be part of the minority group.
Applied in reverse, it’s like saying a black guy can’t be found to be discriminating against other black guys. Not a lawyer so my interpretation could be wrong
3 Comments
[deleted]
This was a unanimous decision.
While I disagree that this (reverse discrimination) is a serious problem that needs to be dealt with by the Supreme Court, the lower courts’ reasoning that this ruling threw out was pretty stupid. Essentially they said the person doing the discriminating must also be part of the minority group.
Applied in reverse, it’s like saying a black guy can’t be found to be discriminating against other black guys. Not a lawyer so my interpretation could be wrong