> It's not because we learned new things about the Constitution in the last 20 years. Funnily enough, from the majority opinion of the "precedent" they may ove

> It's not because we learned new things about the Constitution in the last 20 years. Funnily enough, from the majority opinion of the "precedent" they may overturn: "The Court expects that 25 years from now, the use of racial preferences will no longer be necessary to further the interest approved today."