Careful precedent selection: the first "disparate impact" case (Griggs) actually involved what was clearly intentional discrimination.
@admittedlyhuman yes, but it seems actually devious (maybe just because I personally bought it for this reason for so long)
-
-
@sarahdoingthing well, reformers openly talk about picking which cases they fight in the Supreme Court to optimize for success. -
@sarahdoingthing so I would say it's not "devious" so much as "hypocritical" - 3 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.