United States District Court, D. Massachusetts.

Biographical details

United States District Court, D. Massachusetts. Julia A. McLaughlin, by Catherine McLaughlin…

Referring to strict scrutiny of an affirmative action practice regarding correctional officers, he wrote:
While we may assume that a practice that is subject to the skeptical, questioning, beady-eyed scrutiny that the law requires when public officials use race to allocate burdens or benefits is not illegal per se, it can survive that intense scrutiny only if the defendants show that they are motivated by a truly powerful and worthy concern and that the racial measure that they have adopted is a plainly apt response to that concern.
Source: Wikisource

United States District Court, D. Massachusetts. Julia A. McLaughlin, by Catherine McLaughlin…

Finally, we wish to dispel the notion that strict scrutiny is "strict in theory, but fatal in fact." ... The unhappy persistence of both the practice and the lingering effects of racial discrimination against minority groups in this country is an unfortunate reality, and government is not disqualified from acting in response to it.
Source: Wikisource

United States District Court, D. Massachusetts. Julia A. McLaughlin, by Catherine McLaughlin…

While there are many factors that probably contribute to this difference, I consider it unlikely that the Boston public school system is not shortchanging its black and Hispanic students in some fashion that contributes both to this difference and to the consistent relative lack of success in such students' obtaining invitations to attend Latin School in the period following the Court's finding of intentional discrimination. While societal discrimination alone is insufficient to justify a racial classification, it does not follow that it is irrelevant.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature