Question

1. assess an argument look at the photo of allan bakke again, and reread its caption. supreme court justice sandra day o’connor wrote, “the constitution protects persons, not groups. whenever the government treats any person unequally because of his or her race, that person has suffered an injury.” how do justice o’connor’s words apply to reverse discrimination?

Explanation:

Reverse discrimination (e.g., in college admissions or hiring) involves preferential treatment for certain groups (like minority groups) over others (e.g., white individuals) based on race. Justice O’Connor’s statement emphasizes that the Constitution protects individuals, not groups. So, if reverse discrimination treats a person (e.g., a white applicant) unequally because of their race (by denying them a spot to favor a minority applicant), it violates the idea that the government shouldn’t treat people unequally based on race—even if the intent is to address past discrimination, the unequal treatment of an individual based on race is seen as an injury, per her argument. Her words imply reverse discrimination, when it treats individuals differently by race, is unconstitutional as it harms individuals’ equal protection under the law.

Answer:

Justice O’Connor’s words imply reverse discrimination (treating individuals unequally by race, even to address past discrimination) violates the Constitution’s equal - protection of individuals. If reverse discrimination treats a person (e.g., a white applicant) differently because of their race (e.g., denying them a position to favor a minority applicant), it “injures” that person (as the government treated them unequally by race), going against her view that the Constitution protects persons, not groups, and forbids racial - based unequal treatment of individuals.