Explaining Grutter v. Bollinger

Adequacy and the Public Rights Model of the Class Action After Gratz v. Bollinger

Yale Law School Legal Scholarship Repository

The Supreme Court’s affirmative action decisions in Grutter v. Bollinger and Gratz v. Bollinger changed the meaning of “narrow tailoring.” While the narrow tailoring requirement has always had multiple dimensions, a central meaning has been that the government must use the smallest racial preference needed to achieve its compelling interest. We might have expected, therefore, that if the Court ...

Particle Swarm Optimization of Bollinger Bands

The use of technical indicators to derive stock trading signals is a foundation of financial technical analysis. Many of these indicators have several parameters which creates a difficult optimization problem given the highly non-linear and non-stationary nature of a financial timeseries. This study investigates a popular financial indicator, Bollinger Bands, and the fine tuning of its paramete...

Contingency V . Structures in Explaining Judicial Behavior

tuart Chinn has written an interesting – and truly informative – article on the role that the United States Supreme Court has played in stabilizing the American socio-political order following periods of transformation. Almost inevitably, he suggests, the transformations are less extensive and go less deeply than their proponents might have wished, not least because the Court, for a variety of ...

Racial Integration as a Compelling Interest

The premise of this symposium is that the principle and ideal developed in Brown v. Board of Education and its successor cases lie at the heart of the rationale for affirmative action in higher education. The principle of the school desegregation cases is that racial segregation is an injustice that demands remediation. The ideal of the school desegregation cases is that racial integration is a...