Document Type
Article
Publication Date
2023
ISSN
0039-4696
Publisher
Suffolk University School of Law
Language
en-US
Abstract
The question “what is equality?”, applied to the distribution of resources across races, suggests the following answer: when there appears to be no need for a policy that focuses on improving the welfare of one race relative to another. There is another way to approach the same question: equality is when traditionally-recognized paths to advancement do not give preference to or disadvantage an individual because of his race. Notice the difference here is between end-state and process-based notions of equality, a distinction Nozick emphasized in his examination of justice in distribution. Nozick rejected end-state theories of justice in distribution. I side with Nozick’s approach and argue that the only morally justifiable and administratively feasible approach to determining equality in the distribution of resources across races is through a process-based definition. I explore the implications of this argument for Grutter v. Bollinger.
Recommended Citation
Keith N. Hylton,
Two Approaches to Equality, with Implications for Grutter
,
in
56
Suffolk University Law Review
47
(2023).
Available at:
https://scholarship.law.bu.edu/faculty_scholarship/3337
Draft available on SSRN
Included in
Civil Rights and Discrimination Commons, Constitutional Law Commons, Law and Race Commons
Comments
Updated with published article on 5/26/23