1. Some (forgive me, inchoate) thoughts, tl;dr of which: (a) Yes, this is happening, it's a little odd progressives are pretending it's not, when they were celebrating same about a decade ago; (b) Yes, civil rights law is reinforcing this, and while I am not ordinarily one...

https://twitter.com/herandrews/status/1978793394978603116

2. ... to understate the influence of civil rights law on culture, here civil rights law is imho reinforcing broader trends driven by technology and abundance. Though I hope disparate impact will be held unconstitutional within this decade by SCOTUS and am guardedly...

1. A lot of the news coverage of this has implied that Civil Rights Division lawyers are apolitical expert technocrats who neutrally follow the law and facts whereever they may lead. This is true in some individual cases but alas wildly naive optimism about CRT as a whole...

https://twitter.com/JewishWarrior13/status/1917144706150011328

2. In my second year out of law school, I was hired as a special assistant/(very junior) counsel to Gail Heriot, one member of the eight-member Civil Rights Commission. The first big project we took on after I got there was an investigation into the Obama DOJ's handling of....

1. Three important executive orders on civil rights/equality and opportunity issues today. "Restoring Equality of Opportunity and Meritocracy" essentially abolishes disparate impact rules and enforcement throughout the federal gov't. 2. By way of refresher: there are essentially two types of federal civil rights laws. Disparate treatment prohibits actual discrimination. Disparate impact prohibits practices that have an adverse effect and are not...

1. From the press release @PacificLegal put out today on President Biden's ERA declaration: "Individuals should be treated as individuals and not subject to arbitrary government discrimination based on their sex. The Fourteenth Amendment already guarantees individuals... 2. ... men and women alike, equal protection of the laws. Accordingly, an Equal Rights Amendment that restates that individuals have a right to be free from government discrimination on the basis of sex is an unnecessary constitutional redundancy.

1. I don't entirely care for applying ideological labels to Supreme Court justices because their job is to get the law right, regardless of their leanings. But if we're going to do this, Amy Coney Barrett voted for the preferred conservative outcome in Dobbs (abortion), SFFA.. 2. (affirmative action), Bruen (guns), Loper-Bright and Relentless (overturning Chevron judicial deference), 303 Creative (clash between free speech and anti-discrimination law) and Sackett v. EPA (environmental law). She voted for the pro-Trump outcome in...

1. Have tweeted similar things before, but I think part of what's going on here is that college educated progressives are highly conscientious people who are overly sensitive of the downsides of high conscientiousness, and this informs their thinking about public policy.

https://twitter.com/Noahpinion/status/1861097869081772102

2. Take the health stuff that's the topic of Noah's thread: in general, it's good to be conscientious, not to eat too much of anything, to minimize consumption of sugary foods and to exercise regularly. But it is *also* possible to take those generally good principles to an...

Very disappointed to see the Supreme Court declined to grant cert in Coalition for TJ v. Fairfax County School Board. Justice Alito wrote a blistering dissental, in which he called the Fourth Circuit's opinion "indefensible." More in PLF press release:

pacificlegal.org/press-release/… Individuals should be treated as individuals and not on the basis of their membership in racial groups. Heartbreaking as this setback is, we'll keep fighting to uphold that crucial legal and moral principle.