Well, someone should definitely ask Judge Barrett what she thinks of Heart of Atlanta Motel, among others.

In 2021, will there be 5 votes to overturn Wong Kim Ark? If somehow Trump is reelected and McConnell remains in control, this is a logical and necessary step for their project.

On the OP, I'll offer ex recto that this won't get to the US Sup Ct for 3 years at least, given my (only barely justified) prejudices about timing in the California courts, so (a) we'll be in a different and unrecognizable world already and (b) there will have been some experience with how it's working. Does it genuinely add diverse voices to corporate governance? Or are there going to be 50 people who take up nominal do-nothing board seats at 1,000 corporations.

2: Does narrow targeting really entail the courts doing a full analysis of policy effectiveness?

3 It'll be in the record for cherry-picking by those who think that anything that doesn't not ensure white supremacy must be a violation of the equal protection clause. Because nothing can be more certain than that the original intent of the 14th amendment was to protect white supremacy.

If affirmative action gets un-banned by the California voters next month, that will be a new point of friction with SCOTUS. However that is not polling well.

If affirmative action isn't allowed, the best course is to hope Trump has made white people prejudiced against white people.

He's exacerbated my pre-existing antipathy.

If affirmative action is outlawed and replaced with white supremacy, only outlaws will try to replace white supremacy with affirmative action.

What are the chances that this court case strikes down just this CA public corporation affirmative action, vs. affirmative action more broadly? Because, I'm not a lawyer so my recto is even more ex than Charlie's, but some kinds of affirmative action seem a lot more beneficial to society than this.

My nightmare is that not only will Wong Kim Ark will be overturned, they will come up with some jank ass way of retroactively applying it to people like yours truly.

9 I think the idea is that an opinion overturning that CA statute is going to more or less say that states can't ever do anything at all that is even a little bit unequal wrt race, including fixing prior inequality.

10 Right, and that would be the point. I don't know how many people you could de-naturalize if you decide that WKA was wrongly decided, but it might even be enough to restore the Republican party in California.

You know, I bet Trump would also like to see Shelley v. Kraemer overturned, if someone explained what it is about.

10 is a terrifying possibility.