We discussed the controversial topic of affirmative action in the context of the interpretation of the equal protection clause. After I reviewed the strict scrutiny standard employed when a law or policy treats one gender ,race , or religion different from another, I explained the holding in the Bakke case upholding certain affirmative action policies while disallowing numerical quotas. We discussed the Court's rationale for finding a compelling government reason for the policy and discussed later cases upholding a "plus" point system in college and law school admissions. We then critically addressed how a change in the Supreme Court justices significantly impacts the court's decisions. I discussed the recent case now before the Court challenging the affirmative action policies of Harvard and the Univ. of North Carolina and outlined the arguments advanced against affirmative action in those cases. We discussed how the litigants in these cases argue that the equal protection clause protects all "persons" and is not the exclusive legal tool of marginalized communities. On the other hand, it is argued that the 14th Amendment was intended to ensure and protect the rights of freed slaves and therefore logically should not be used to dismantle programs that protect African American communities notwithstanding the literal language of the amendment.