Welcome back to 10 blocks. This is Brian Anderson, the editor of City Journal.

This week's special episode features a

conversation with Manhattan Institute's Senior Fellow and Director of Constitutional Studies,

Ilya Shapiro, M.I. Book Fellow, University of San Diego Law Professor and U.S. Commission

on Civil Rights member, Gail Harriet, and Manhattan Institute fellow Wehwa Chin.

They are discussing the Supreme Court's momentous ruling in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard,

that the use of race in determining university admissions is unconstitutional.

Both Shapiro and Weiwa have written on this topic for City Journal. You can find

those pieces on the website. We hope you enjoy this fascinating discussion. Good afternoon.

My name is Ilya Shapiro. I'm the director of constitutional studies at the Manhattan Institute,

and I'm delighted to present this very rapid response

after decision panel on the ruling in Students for Fair Admissions versus Harvard and UNC,

two cases that have been effectively consolidated, then unconsolidated, then reconciledated,

just with the note that Justice Jackson, because she was on the board of overseers of Harvard,

did not participate in that aspect of the case.

And the court ruled, I assume everyone knows who's tuning in, at least the top line, by a six to three vote, the court ruled, I assume everyone knows who's tuning in at least the top line by a six to three vote,

the court ruled that using race in the way that Harvard and UNC have for their admissions decision,

basically the way that most selective institutions use race is unconstitutional,

violates the equal protection clause.

Justice, there are 237 pages of total opinions of which Chief Justice Roberts majority

joined by five other justices, the more conservative ones, is only 40 pages of that.

It's very tight.

...