As the Supreme Court prepares to once again weigh questions of whether racial identity should be considered in admissions, Dean Vikram Amar and Professor Jason Mazzone point to a case from the court's "shadow docket" that could illustrate the direction the court is headed.

The case came from the Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit and involved changes in the admissions policy at a selective public school in Virginia. The plaintiffs were successful in district court in arguing that the school's policy used an impermissible form of "racial balancing." However, the decision was stayed by the Fourth Circuit, pending appellate review, prompting the plaintiffs to ask the Supreme Court to overturn the stay. The Supreme Court declined to overturn the stay, but three justices noted they would have overturned the decision without further explanation. 

In their article, Amar and Mazzone break down the case and how the brief writings of the justices in this decision could have further effects on court decisions regarding race, affirmative action, and education.

Read the full article at Justia.