In Thornburg, the Court rejected formalism. Instead, the Court found that the historical voting patterns of races were essential to deciding the case. The Court also acknowledged the socioeconomic data related to minorities. When courts are not constrained by the rigid requirements of formalism, it allows for a result that is better reasoned. Additionally, Courts can focus on reaching the correct result, rather than the method to reach a result.
IV. A Step in the Wrong Direction—Affirmative Action
From 1954 through 1986, the Court seemed to reject formalism. The landmark decisions of Brown, Loving, and Thornburg gave African-Americans hope that the history of discrimination they experienced would be recognized, considered, and rectified by the Court moving forward. But, this was simply a hiatus. The Court would return to formalism in the context of affirmative action.
As previously discussed, the Court first introduced the levels of judicial review into Constitutional jurisprudence in United States v. Carolene Products Co. The lowest level of review is rational basis, where deference is given to the legislature’s judgment. Under this level of review, the legislation at issue is almost always upheld. At the other end of the …show more content…
In these cases, a city attempted to increase diversity within its construction industry, a university attempted to increase diversity among its student body, and a school district attempted to increase diversity within its public school system. All of these initiatives are noteworthy and would produce a benefit to those involved, but, because the Court was only focused on applying strict scrutiny, rather than achieving the most beneficial result, these affirmative action plans were determined to be
IV. A Step in the Wrong Direction—Affirmative Action
From 1954 through 1986, the Court seemed to reject formalism. The landmark decisions of Brown, Loving, and Thornburg gave African-Americans hope that the history of discrimination they experienced would be recognized, considered, and rectified by the Court moving forward. But, this was simply a hiatus. The Court would return to formalism in the context of affirmative action.
As previously discussed, the Court first introduced the levels of judicial review into Constitutional jurisprudence in United States v. Carolene Products Co. The lowest level of review is rational basis, where deference is given to the legislature’s judgment. Under this level of review, the legislation at issue is almost always upheld. At the other end of the …show more content…
In these cases, a city attempted to increase diversity within its construction industry, a university attempted to increase diversity among its student body, and a school district attempted to increase diversity within its public school system. All of these initiatives are noteworthy and would produce a benefit to those involved, but, because the Court was only focused on applying strict scrutiny, rather than achieving the most beneficial result, these affirmative action plans were determined to be