Rothstein shares and reflects upon a written statement by Chief Justice John Roberts:
When Chief Justice John Roberts wrote that if residential segregation is a product not of state action but of private choices, it does not have constitutional implications, he set forth a principle. But the principle supported his conclusion – that government remedies for segregation were impermissible- only because he assumed an inaccurate factual background: that residential segregation was mostly created by private choices. (page 215)
Some have argued that Rothstein should send copies of his book to Roberts as evidence that residential discrimination is du jure, a result of state action. Provide specific examples of Rothsteins arguments that you think are especially compelling to counter the Chief Justices conclusion.
