office and the justice department who objected, who didn t want anything to do with defending the racial dating ban but the reagan administration took this radical line on it and took it all the way to the supreme court and when it got to the supreme court they got destroyed. the court ruled against the reagan administration and racist bob jones university by a vote of 8-1. anthony lieu lewis wrote in the york times the 8-1 decision was worse than an embarrassment for president reagan and his lawyers, it was a humiliation. how couldn t president be given such incompetent legal advice? how could lawyers for the u.s. government stray so far from the mainstream of the country s understanding of the racial issue? how a president at this stage in our history could play with this kind of an issue for political reasons. one troubling aspect about the bob jones affair is what it says about the justice department today. an attorney general is supposed to protect his president, not
this was not, like, in the 1940s. the federal government sided with bob jones university on their race ban for dating by their students and even at the time in 1982 it was seen as a pretty radical thing for the federal government to be doing. there were people inside the reagan government, there were people inside, for example, reagan s solicitor general s office and the justice department who objected, who didn t want anything to do with defending the racial dating ban but the reagan administration took this radical line on it and took it all the way to the supreme court and when it got to the supreme court they got destroyed. the court ruled against the reagan administration and racist bob jones university by a vote of 8-1. anthony lieu lewis wrote in the york times the 8-1 decision was worse than an embarrassment for president reagan and his lawyers, it was a humiliation. how couldn t president be given such incompetent legal advice? how could lawyers for the u.s.