SFFA and the Memory Wars

The Supreme Court’s decision in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard (SFFA) effectively ended race-conscious affirmative action in college admissions as we know it. While much of the existing literature focuses on the practical implications of this decision, the distinct focus of this Article is on the historical narrative constructed by the SFFA decision and its impact on the constitutional memory of race and racism. The Article makes three key contributions: First, it demonstrates how the SFFA majority opinion distorts collective recollections of racism, akin to bans on Critical Race Theory, undermining racial redress legitimacy. Second, it analyzes the amicus curiae briefs in SFFA to uncover how universities and other proponents of affirmative action participated in forming the ahistorical memory claims that were ultimately adopted and applied by the SFFA majority. Third, the Article proposes strategies for reshaping collective memories at the grassroots level. Somewhat paradoxically, I argue that the current composition of the Court offers an auspicious opportunity to prioritize reclaiming diversity in ways that foreground America’s racial history—not as a normative imperative, but as a means for critically evaluating legal frameworks and social commitments.

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
eYLS (Yale Law School)
Published
2025-06-23
DOI
https://doi.org/10.58112/jcl.27-2.2
Primary Topic
Legal Systems and Judicial Processes
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

SFFA and the Memory Wars

eYLS (Yale Law School)
Legal Systems and Judicial Processes
article

SFFA and the Memory Wars

article en

Abstract

The Supreme Court’s decision in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard (SFFA) effectively ended race-conscious affirmative action in college admissions as we know it. While much of the existing literature focuses on the practical implications of this decision, the distinct focus of this Article is on the historical narrative constructed by the SFFA decision and its impact on the constitutional memory of race and racism. The Article makes three key contributions: First, it demonstrates how the SFFA majority opinion distorts collective recollections of racism, akin to bans on Critical Race Theory, undermining racial redress legitimacy. Second, it analyzes the amicus curiae briefs in SFFA to uncover how universities and other proponents of affirmative action participated in forming the ahistorical memory claims that were ultimately adopted and applied by the SFFA majority. Third, the Article proposes strategies for reshaping collective memories at the grassroots level. Somewhat paradoxically, I argue that the current composition of the Court offers an auspicious opportunity to prioritize reclaiming diversity in ways that foreground America’s racial history—not as a normative imperative, but as a means for critically evaluating legal frameworks and social commitments.

eYLS (Yale Law School)
Tel Aviv University (IL)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions, Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 53%
Legal Systems and Judicial Processes
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

SFFA and the Memory Wars · eYLS (Yale Law School) (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS