Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=622944
 


 



Affirmative Refraction: Grutter v. Bollinger Through the Lens of the Case of the Speluncean Explorers


Paul L. Caron


Pepperdine University - School of Law

Rafael Gely


University of Missouri School of Law


Constitutional Commentary, Vol. 21, p. 65, 2004

Abstract:     
This Article looks at the Supreme Court's recent decision on the use of race in law school admissions through the lens of the famous hypothetical about human cannibalism constructed by Lon Fuller (62 Harv. L. Rev. 616 (1949)). The hypothetical has challenged law students and legal scholars for over half a century, and in recent years scholars have issued dozens of new "opinions" to take into account contemporary legal theories (including symposia in 112 Harv. L. Rev. 1834 (1999) and 61 Geo. Wash. L. Rev. 1731 (1993)). This Article is the first to take the opposite approach and view a real-life legal issue through the eyes of the fictional Justices in The Case of the Speluncean Explorers.

We argue that the various opinions in Grutter find their intellectual forebears in the opinions in The Case of the Speluncean Explorers. For all of the heat and light generated by Grutter, the opinions merely mark another way station in the centuries-old debate among competing jurisprudential philosophies of the role of law and government. By examining the Grutter opinions in the context of this rich jurisprudential tradition, we hope to elevate much of the current debate about the case, in which labels like "liberal" and "conservative" are hurled about like epithets, toward a more sophisticated understanding of how the various approaches of the Justices embody alternative views of the proper judicial function in our democratic system.

The Article introduces a novel jurisprudential approach to judicial decision-making ­ what we refer to as a "jurisprudence of humility." Building on the recent work of ideologically diverse scholars, we argue that a jurisprudence of humility recognizes that judges and lawyers hold no monopoly on wisdom and that, in certain situations, institutions other than courts may be better positioned to resolve a particular issue. This jurisprudence of humility construct enables us to draw some rather surprising connections between The Case of the Speluncean Explorers and Grutter and span the gulf in the legal literature between statutory construction and constitutional interpretation.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 45

Keywords: Affirmative Action, Jurisprudence, Judicial Humility

JEL Classification: K39

Accepted Paper Series





Download This Paper

Date posted: November 19, 2004  

Suggested Citation

Caron, Paul L. and Gely, Rafael, Affirmative Refraction: Grutter v. Bollinger Through the Lens of the Case of the Speluncean Explorers. Constitutional Commentary, Vol. 21, p. 65, 2004. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=622944

Contact Information

Paul L. Caron (Contact Author)
Pepperdine University - School of Law ( email )
24255 Pacific Coast Highway
Malibu, CA 90263
United States
310.506.7521 (Phone)
Rafael Gely
University of Missouri School of Law ( email )
Missouri Avenue & Conley Avenue
Columbia, MO 65211
United States
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 9,824
Downloads: 746
Download Rank: 18,067

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo7 in 0.344 seconds