Michael Perry on Fisher v. University of Texas
Michael Perry (Emory University School of Law) has posted Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin: An Imagined Opinion, Concurring in the Judgment on SSRN. Here is the abstract:
In Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin, decided on June 23, 2016, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that the race-based admissions system at issue in the case did not violate the Equal Protection Clause. Whether the ruling was correct is one question; whether, even if the ruling was correct, the reasoning was correct is, of course, a different question.
This brief paper is an imagined opinion — an opinion by an imaginary justice of the Supreme Court, Justice Nemo — concurring in the judgment. Justice Nemo believes that her concurring opinion is in alignment with the theory of judicial review elaborated and defended in this paper: Michael J. Perry, “A Theory of Judicial Review,” http://ssrn.com/abstract=2624978.
For another concurring opinion by Justice Nemo — her concurring opinion, last June, in the same-sex marriage case — see Michael J. Perry, “Obergefell v. Hodges: An Imagined Opinion, Concurring in the Judgment,” http://ssrn.com/abstract=2624022.