Document Type

Article

Publication Title

Yale Law Journal

Abstract

The recent reinstatement of the California Civil Rights Initiative (CCRI) withdrew many opportunities for racial minorities and women in important public sectors. As a legal matter, the 9th Circuit decision that justified this result - Coalition for Economic Equity v. Wilson (1997) - rests on questionable grounds. The appeals employed novel reasoning to distinguish the Supreme Court's "political structure" equal protection precedent - the so-called Hunter doctrine - which invalidates initiatives that obstruct minorities seeking beneficial local legislation. The 9th Circuit held that the Hunter doctrine provides "equal protection rights against political obstructions to equal protection," not "equal protection rights against political obstructions to preferential treatment." A paper argues that the 9th Circuit's confusion of sex-based equal protection and strict scrutiny - especially in a case justifying the permanent withdrawal of state preferences for women - runs afoul of doctrinal principles and precedent.

First Page

261

DOI

https://doi.org/10.2307/797281

Volume

107

Publication Date

1997

Download

Share

COinS