David Simson

I am much too late to the party here :) but in case it's helpful for the future, Kim Crenshaw's Race, Reform, and Retrenchment could also be a helpful nuanced take! (101 Harv. L. Rev. 1331 (1988))

... legally drawn *as* distinctions and conceptually important, then that says something in and of itself I think

... different constitutional and conceptual Qs. I have issues with some of those cases but not because they draw this conceptual distinction as such. If we're now at the stage where Justices cavalierly collapse distinctions that are not only linguistically clear but also...

Even setting aside SFFA (which has many probs I've tried to write about :)), my understanding is that "predominate/dominant factor" was used in (voting) cases in part precisely to draw a distinction btw "one consideration/a factor" and a more "intense" use (dominant/predominant) bc the two raise...

Isn't another part of the many problems that the claim on its own terms doesn't work without more? "one consideration" is not the same as "predominated" unless you define one as equaling the other. That is not how I understand either people in general or cases to define or use those terms.

Congratulations!!

Thank you to @lsolum.bsky.social for the kind mention! I am also excited to share that the piece has found a home with Buffalo Law Review and will come out either late this year or early next year - looking forward to working with their team!

New URL for a key website!

Happening today! Hope you can join and even if not, you should read @mgraber1.bsky.social's insightful and thought-provoking book :)

@korematsuctr.bsky.social @justinnyls.bsky.social @donigewirtzman.bsky.social @beidelson.bsky.social @hellmandeborah.bsky.social @hwinant.bsky.social @jackchin.bsky.social @admutua.bsky.social @kimberlecrenshaw.bsky.social @lsolum.bsky.social @richardre.bsky.social

Many people whose work, thoughts, or comments were really helpful in informing me re one or more of the many issues addressed in this piece are not (I think) on Bsky but i can note at least (in the hope that this is appropriate): @jpygold.bsky.social @adamwinkler.bsky.social @jerchin.bsky.social

As a junior scholar, I'm admittedly a bit uneasy re posting before acceptance for publication. But revisions pushed me past journals' August cycle & yet I think the piece can help inform thinking about SFFA's mobilization in many problematic actions such as this news.bloomberglaw.com/litigation/f...

For context, and if of interest, this Article follows up on my prior Article "Methodological Gerrymandering" (papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....) in which I analyze how SCOTUS Justices might alter their constitutional interpretation methodology in pursuit of ideological preferences.

Re weaponization of SFFA, I provide examples (esp. by current admin) and discuss SFFA's role in them, incl. SFFA's conceptual gerrymandering re race specifically. I discuss how, taking my analysis seriously, one might think about this weaponization & how we engage on issues of race more broadly. end

Re SFFA, I analyze how the majority conceptualizes "race" inconsistently in different places and suggest that the underlying pattern is not random but indicates pursuit of ideological preferences re maintaining status quo racial hierarchy (briefer analysis of Gorsuch concurrence re same too) 4/

I explain in some depth how this might work re "race" in particular, which requires some detailed understanding of contestations around what race "is" (eg biological vs social construction, versions of each, etc) and how race and law interact with each other. I then apply insights gained to SFFA. 3/

Re "conceptual gerrymandering," I explain how one way in which SCOTUS Justices may pursue ideological preferences via jurisprudential choices (ie engage in what i call "jurisprudential gerrymandering") is by altering definitions of legally relevant social concepts (eg race, religion, sex) 2/

I just posted the current version of my most recent Article, "Conceptual Gerrymandering and the Weaponization of SFFA" to @ssrn.bsky.social. Abstract and TOC are attached below. Comments and (good faith) critiques very much welcome and appreciated. 🧵 1/
papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....

@yuvrajjoshi.bsky.social has an uncanny ability to identify crucial issues at the intersection of law and racial equality and to provide deep analysis & helpful frameworks to understand complexity and stakes. Racial resentment (re which i've also written some) is another example. Important to engage

I feel privileged to get to participate in a small role in this amazing event celebrating @mgraber1.bsky.social's very important book. If you are in NYC on October 10, please RSVP and come join! www.nyls.edu/events/book-...