>> Braude: TONIGHT ON "GREATER BOSTON," NATIONAL SECURITY EXPERT JULIETTE KAYYEM JOINS ME ON THE BRUTAL ASSAULT ON NANCY PELOSI'S HUSBAND, JUST THE LATEST CASE OF VIOLENT EXTREMISM IN THE U.S. THAT HAS EXPERTS, LAW ENFORCEMENT AND POLL WORKERS INCREASINGLY ON EDGE AS WE NEAR ELECTION DAY.

PLUS, THE SUPREME COURT TAKES UP A PAIR OF CASES THAT COULD REVERSE DECADES OF AFFIRMATIVE ACTION POLICIES AT COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES.

I'M JOINED BY TWO EXPERTS WITH DIFFERENT TAKES ON FACTORING RACE INTO THE ADMISSIONS PROCESS.

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ >> Braude: WHILE FRIDAY'S ATTACK ON HOUSE SPEAKER NANCY PELOSI'S HUSBAND WAS CERTAINLY DISTURBING, IT'S HARD TO SAY IT WAS SHOCKING, AFTER THE POLITICAL ANIMUS AND VIOLENT RHETORIC WE'VE SEEN IN RECENT YEARS.

PROSECUTORS SAY THE Q-ANON-SUPPORTING SUSPECT, DAVID DAPAPE, WENT AFTER PAUL PELOSI WITH A HAMMER AFTER HE BROKE INTO THE HOME AND COULDN'T FIND THE SPEAKER.

FEDERAL PROSECUTORS CHARGED DEPAPE TODAY WITH ATTEMPTED KIDNAPPING, AND WITH RETALIATING AGAINST A FEDERAL OFFICIAL BY THREATENING OR INJURING A FAMILY MEMBER, AND POLICE SAY HE HAD A LIST OF OTHER PEOPLE HE MAY HAVE PLANNED TO TARGET.

PAUL PELOSI IS STILL IN THE HOSPITAL RECOVERING FROM SURGERY TO REPAIR A FRACTURED SKULL.

WHILE MANY PROMINENT REPUBLICANS HAVE SPOKEN OUT AGAINST THE ATTACK, ONE, IN PARTICULAR, HAS NOT.

HIS SUCCESSOR DID, THOUGH: >> YOU CAN'T JUST SAY "I FEEL BADLY ABOUT THE VIOLENCE AND CONDEMN IT."

CONDEMN WHAT PRODUCES THE VIOLENCE.

THIS TALK PRODUCES THE VIOLENCE.

>> Braude: I'M JOINED BY FORMER HOMELAND SECURITY OFFICIAL JULIETTE KAYYEM.

SHE'S ALSO A SENIOR LECTURER AT HARVARD'S KENNEDY SCHOOL OF GOVERNMENT, CNN COMMENTATOR AND OF COURSE, A LONGTIME BOSTON PUBLIC RADIO REGULAR.

JULIETTE IT'S GOOD TO SEE YOU.

>> GOOD TO SEE YOU.

>> Braude: IF REPORTS ARE TO BE BELIEVED IF NANCY PELOSI WAS HOME IT'S FAIRLY LIKELY SHE WOULD BE MURDERED.

DOES THE BRUTAL ATTACK ON HER HUSBAND AND THE NEAR MISS WITH HER CHANGE ANYTHING OR IS IT BUSINESS AS USUAL?

>> I HOPE IT IS NOT BUSINESS AS USUAL.

WE KNOW FROM THE SUSPECT THAT THE INTENDED VICTIM WAS NANCY PELOSI.

HE SAID, WHERE IS NANCY EIGHTH," AND HE HAS CONFESSED TO WANT TO TIE HER UP, GET HER TO TELL THE TRUTH, IF SHE DIDN'T TELL THE TRUTH PRESUMABLY ABOUT THE ELECTION, HE WOULD BREAK HER KNEECAPS SO SHE WOULD HAVE TO WHEEL HERSELF INTO THE HOUSE CHAMBERS AND OTHER DEMOCRATS WOULD SEE WHAT HAPPENS TO THEM.

SO THE IDEA THAT THIS IS JUST LIKE SAN FRANCISCO CRIME IS RIDICULOUS.

OR THE IDEA THAT PAUL PELOSI IS ANYTHING BUT A STAND-IN FOR HER.

AND THAT'S ESSENTIALLY WHAT THE FEDERAL CHARGES ARE.

THEY ARE IF YOU GO AFTER A FAMILY MEMBER WITH THE INTENTION OF THRORSING OR INTIMIDATING A PUBLIC FIGURE IT'S THE SAME.

SO THIS IS POLITICAL VIOLENCE.

THERE IS NO POINT IN PRETENDING ANYTHING ELSE BY THIS SUBSTANTIALLY.

>> Braude: I MENTIONED A COUPLE OF PROMINENT REPUBLICANS DID THE RIGHT THING.

I'M GOING TO TALK ABOUT SOMEONE WHO DID NOT.

HERE IS THE DARLING OF THE MODERATES, THE NEWLY ELECTED GOVERNOR OF GLEN YUNKEN, THERE HE IS.

>> THAT'S WHAT WE'RE GOING TO GO DO, GO BACK TO CALIFORNIA.

>> Braude: AND ON THE SAME DAY DONALD TRUMP THOUGHT IT WAS NECESSARY TO MENTION THE DEATH OF JERRY LEE LEWIS BUT THE BLUDGEONING OF THE SPEAKER DIDN'T MERIT ANYTHING.

AND FINALLY THE NEW OWNER OF TWITTER TWEETED AS YOU SEE HERE.

THERE'S A TINY POSSIBILITY THERE IS GOING TO BE MORE THAN THIS TO MEET THE EYE.

SAN DIEGO OBSERVER, A SCANDALOUS THING, IT'S SO, MUSK HIMSELF DELETED IT HOURS LATER.

IT SEEMS TO ME THAT OTHERS COULD NOTHING BUT ENCOURAGE OTHERS TO DO NOTHING, RIGHT?

>> THEY NEED A COUNTERNARRATIVE TO WIPE THEIR HANDS OF A VIOLENT MOVEMENT THAT THEY CERTAINLY NURTURE HOR EMBRACE FOR A COUPLE OF YEARS.

EVEN SOMEONE LIKE YUNKIN WHO IS APPARENTLY A MODERATE, GOES OUT TO SUPPORT THE CANDIDATE FROM ARIZONA, WITH CARRII LAKE, WHO IS A STOP THE STEAL JANUARY 6th TRUE PERSON.

THERE IS NO REASON TO CALL HIM A MODERATE ANYMORE.

SO THAT'S ESSENTIALLY WHAT'S HAPPENING.

WE HAVE NO RESPONSIBILITY FOR THIS.

AND BY THE WAY THERE IS SOME OTHER NARRATIVE IT'S EITHER CRIME OR SOME SCANDALOUS OR DISGUSTING THEORY AND SO THEN PEOPLE START TALKING ABOUT THAT.

THE OTHER REASON WHY THIS IS DANGEROUS OR WHY THEY DO IT IS BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY IN THE SILENCE, EVEN IN THE SILENCE LET ALONE THE JOKES OR THE NURTURING, THIS IS WHERE ALL OF THIS VIOLENCE FESS TERSE.

BECAUSE IT IS NOT SHUT DOWN BY THE LEADERSHIP OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY.

AND I HAVE TO SAY LOOK, I'LL CONCEDE THAT THERE'S VIOLENCE ON THE LEFT, WE'VE CERTAINLY SEEN IT ON THE LEFT.

YOU CANNOT SAY WITH A SEPARATE FACE THAT ANY PERSON IN LEADERSHIP OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY WOULD SUPPORT LET ALONE BASICALLY NURTURE AND COMPLIMENT VIOLENCE IN A WAY THAT AN APPARATUS, AN APPARATUS LED BY THEIR LIKELY THOM KNEE IN 2024 HAS DONE SO.

SO THE -- NOMINEE IN 2024 HAS DONE SO.

HAD A THAT IS WHAT IS HAPPENING AT THIS STAGE.

AND THE PATHETIC THING FOR REPUBLICANS IS THEY COULD REALLY -- YOU KNOW TRUMP IS WEAKER THAN THEY THINK AND THEY CONSTANTLY TREAT HIM LIKE VOLDAMORT, ON HALLOWEEN, I'LL MAKE THAT REFERENCE.

IF THEY START TO ISOLATE HIM OVER THIS AND OTHER THINGS THEY CAN RID HIM OF WHAT HE'S DOING.

>> Braude: YOU KNOW, STAYING WITH THE THEME, I'D VOTE FOR VOLDEMORT RATHER THAN THE OTHER THING.

JULIETTE WE ALL KNOW BECAUSE THE ELECTION WAS STOLEN FROM DONALD TRUMP, ACCORDING TO DONALD TRUMP, WE GOT JANUARY 6th.

IS THERE ANY REERCH WHY ANY OF THE ELECTION DENIERS RUNNING FOR GOVERNOR OR SENATE, IF THEY LOSE IS THERE ANY REASON TO THINK THEY'RE NOT GOING TO SAY THEIR ELECTION WAS STOLEN AND MAYBE LOCALLY WHO KNOWS, MORE THAN THE JANUARY 6th SAME IS A WEEK AWAY FROM US?

>> THAT IS EXACTLY THE FEAR.

THAT, I WOULDN'T ANTICIPATE CARRIE LAKE WOULD WE ARE SEEING THIS IN BRAZIL.

>> Braude: BOLSANARO.

>> >>> HAS NOT CONCEDED YET.

THEY ARE BABIES AND SORE LOSERS.

THE OTHER THING THAT MAKES ME NERVOUS, SHOULD BE GOING INTO NEXT WEEK IS CERTAINLY THIS NARRATIVE THAT IS NOT PROVEN IN THE POLLS.

THAT THINGS ARE AWFULLY LOWS IN PLACES WHERE THEY REALLY DON'T APPEAR TO BE AWFULLY CLOSE.

I UNDERSTAND, MEDIA LIKES A DOGFIGHT AND EVERYTHING LIKE THAT, BUT EVERY LOSER WHO INTENDED TO LOSE WILL THEN CLAIM, THAT THE VOTE WASN'T FAIR.

LOOK, THERE'S -- TRUMP BROKE THE -- HE BROKE HIS OATH IN MANY WAYS.

BUT THE PEACEFUL TRANSFER OF POWER WILL ULTIMATELY I THINK BE HIS MOST -- IT MIGHT BE HIS MOST SUCCESSFUL POLICY IN TERMS OF LEGACY.

BECAUSE PUTTING THE GENIE BACK IN THE BOTTLE IS GOING TO TAKE A LONG TIME.

IT'S GOING TO TAKE DECISIVE CRUSHING IN THE ELECTION AND VOTING WISE, DECIDE -- OF THIS PART OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY.

>> Braude: YOU KNOW SPEAKING OF CRUSHING YOU CONVINCED ME AFTER SAYING IT REPEATEDLY ON THE RADIO WITH US, THAT THE RELENTLESS PROSECUTION OF JANUARY 6th INSURRECTIONISTS WOULD LIKELY QUELL SIMILARLY MINDED PEOPLE IN THE FUTURE.

I'M GOING TO -- I JUST LOOKED UP SOME FBI STATISTICS COMPARING DOMESTIC TERRORISM, THIS IS FROM THE FBI IN 2020 TO 2021.

CAN YOU SEE THE NUMBERS.

I'M SURE YOU KNOW THEM.

THE NUMBERS ESSENTIALLY DOUBLED, APPROXIMATELY, FROM 2020 TO 2021.

SO WERE YOU WRONG, OR SOMETHING ELSE AT PLAY HERE?

>> NO, I THINK THAT THERE'S -- I'M NEVER -- NO, I'M NOT WRONG.

LET ME TELL YOU WHAT IS HAPPENING IS, IS THERE'S NO REASON TO SUSPECT THAT THESE NUMBERS ARE GROWING, IN TERMS OF SUPPORT FOR VIOLENT EXTREMISM.

WHAT WE ARE SEEING IS THAT THE VIOLENT EXTREMISM IS BECOMING MORE TOLERATED IN THE REPUBLICAN PARTY.

SO YOUR OVERALL NUMBERS, THERE'S NOT BEEN A LOT OF ATTACKS FROM NANCY PELOSI, THE CHANGE OF IT, HOW DO I KNOW THIS?

I LOOK AT THE SAME THINGS YOU DO WHICH IS THE RECRUITMENT EFFORTS OF THE MAJOR TERROR ORGANIZATIONS WHICH ARE DEPLETED, THEY CAN'T RAISE MONEY THEY CAN'T RECRUIT, THE IS LIKELY DESPITE EVERYTHING BANKRUPT, AND HE CANNOT FILL A ROOM, IN ANY MEANINGFUL WAY ANYMORE.

HE DOES THESE RAMMIES AND THIS IS THE IRONY OF THE REPUBLICAN OR OU KNOW, IF PEOPLE WHO WANT TO SAVE THE REPUBLICAN PARTY WHICH, THEY -- I HOPE THEY FIGURE IT OUT WHICH IS, YOU -- HE IS -- THIS IS THE MOMENT TO BEGIN THAT SORT OF PURGING OF THAT ELEMENT OF THE GOP, AND IN PARTICULAR, AFTER FRIDAY'S ATTACK AGAINST THE PELOSI FAMILY.

AND THEY JUST CAN'T SEEM TO GET THEMSELVES TO DO IT.

WHICH MAY SUGGEST THEY EITHER DON'T WANT TO OR THEY DON'T KNOW HOW.

BUT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT THE DEMOCRATS CAN'T SAVE THE REPUBLICAN PARTY FROM.

THEY'VE GOT TO FIGURE OUT HOW THEY ISOLATE THIS ELEMENT, OR FOR THOSE WHO DON'T WANT TO ABANDON THE PARTY BUT RIGHT NOW I CAN'T SEPARATE THE VIOLENT EXTREMISM FROM THE PARTY ANYMORE.

>> Braude: ONE OF THE IRONIES I THINK YOU'VE SAID THIS TOO, HAD A FEW MORE RELIABLE SENATORS A FEW YEARS AGO HAD THE COURAGE THEY SAID RIGHT AFTER JANUARY 6th AROUND VOTED GUILTY IN THE IMPEACHMENT TRIAL WE WOULD HAVE HAD A VERY DIFFERENT AMERICA LIKELY.

>> IF MITCH McCONNELL STOOD BY HIS JANUARY 6th GUNS, HE WOULD BE IN FLORIDA ON HIS TRUE SOCIAL.

SO THIS IS NOT -- THIS IS A SIGNIFICANT PROBLEM, BUT THE FRUSTRATION IS THAT THIS IS ALSO SOLVABLE.

AND BUT IT'S GOING TO TAKE THE REPUBLICAN PARTY TO FIGURE IT OUT.

>> Braude: JULIETTE KAYYEM THANK YOU SO MUCH NICE TO SEE YOU.

>> THANK YOU.

NEXT UP, THE SUPREME COURT HEARD ARGUMENTS TODAY IN TWO CASES SEEKING TO END THE PRACTICE OF CONSIDERING RACE IN COLLEGE ADMISSIONS.

THE CASES CENTER ON THE COUNTRY'S OLDEST PUBLIC AND PRIVATE UNIVERSITIES, THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AND HARVARD, AND THE CLAIM THAT THE SCHOOLS VIOLATE EQUAL PROTECTION PRINCIPLES AND DISCRIMINATE AGAINST ASIAN AMERICAN APPLICANTS BY CONSIDERING RACE AS A FACTOR, OR A SO-CALLED "PLUS-FACTOR," IN THE CASE OF U.N.C.

THE GROUP "STUDENTS FOR FAIR ADMISSIONS," LED BY CONSERVATIVE ACTIVIST EDWARD BLUM, IS BEHIND BOTH CHALLENGES.

AND WHILE LOWER COURTS HAVE RULED IN BOTH UNIVERSITIES' FAVOR IN THE PAST, THE CONSERVATIVE MAJORITY IN THE SUPREME COURT TODAY APPEARED VERY INTERESTED IN BLUM'S ARGUMENTS.

>> I DON'T SEE HOW YOU CAN SAY THAT THE PROGRAM WILL EVER END.

YOUR POSITION IS THAT RACE MATTERS BECAUSE IT'S NECESSARY FOR DIVERSITY, WHICH IS NECESSARY FOR THE SORT OF EDUCATION YOU WANT.

IT'S NOT GOING TO STOP MATTERING AT SOME PARTICULAR POINT, YOU'RE ALWAYS GOING TO HAVE TO LOOK AT RACE BECAUSE YOU SAY RACE MATTERS TO GIVE US THE NECESSARY DIVERSITY.

>> Braude: CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS.

I'M JOINED BY NATASHA WARIKOO, A PROFESSOR OF SOCIOLOGY AT TUFTS UNIVERSITY WHOSE BOOK "RACE AT THE TOP: ASIAN AMERICANS AND WHITES IN PURSUIT OF THE AMERICAN DREAM IN SUBURBAN SCHOOLS" CAME OUT EARLIER THIS YEAR.. AND RICHARD KAHLENBERG IS THE AUTHOR OF "THE REMEDY: CLASS, RACE AND AFFIRMATIVE ACTION."

HE ALSO RECENTLY WROTE A PIECE ON THE TOPIC FOR THE GLOBE, TESTIFIED AS AN EXPERT GLOBE," TESTIFIED AS AN EXPERT WITNESS FOR THE PLAINTIFFS WHEN THEIR CASE WAS HEARD IN FOURTH CIRCUIT COURT, AND JUST STEPPED OUT OF THE SUPREME COURT, WHERE HE LISTENED TO ALL FIVE HOURS OF ARGUMENTS.

RICHARD, NATASHA THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME, I APPRECIATE IT.

>> GREAT TO BE HERE.

>> GOOD TO BE HERE.

>> Braude: NATASHA WHY SHOULD THE SUPREME COURT ALLOW RACE TO BE A FACTOR IN ADMISSIONS?

>> IN THE PREVIOUS CASES THAT CAME TO THE SUPREME COURT, THE COURT HAD AFFIRMED THAT DIVERSITY IS A COMPELLING STATE INTEREST, IN ORDER TO CREATE DIVERSITY WE NEED TO PAY ATTENTION TO RACE.

I DIDN'T HEAR ANYTHING TODAY THAT NEGATES, THAT RACE NO LONGER PLAYS A ROLE IN SOCIETY.

I THINK IT IS PRETTY CLEAR AND WE HAVE A LOT OF EVIDENCE THAT THERE ARE ALL OF THESE BENEFITS IN TERMS OF EDUCATIONAL BENEFITS TO A DIVERSE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT.

>> Braude: SO RICHARD, AGAIN, I MENTIONED YOU WERE AN EXPERT WITNESS FOR THE PLAINTIFFS.

WHAT DO YOU THINK THIS COURT SHOULD BE DOING?

>> WELL, FIRST OF ALL I AGREE WITH NATASHA, THAT THERE ARE TREMENDOUS BENEFITS TO RACIAL DIVERSITY ON CAMPUS.

AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE PATHS TO GET THERE.

BUT RESEARCH THAT I DID FOR THE CASE SUGGESTS THAT THERE ARE SO-CALLED RACE NEUTRAL ALTERNATIVES, THAT IS OTHER MEANS TO GETTING RACIAL DIVERSITY AND THE BENEFITS THAT COME FROM THAT.

HARVARD RIGHT NOW FOR EXAMPLE, IS MAJORITY-MINORITY WHICH IS A BEAUTIFUL THING.

BUT IT HAS 15 TIMES AS MANY RICH KIDS AS POOR KIDS THERE.

AND IF THEY WERE TO GIVE A BREAK TO ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS OF ALL RACES, AND TO GET RID OF THE TERRIBLE PREFERENCES THEY GIVE TO RICH KIDS THROUGH LEGACY ALUMNI PREFERENCE, THEN COULD YOU GET RACIAL DIVERSITY WITHOUT ALL THE DIVISION THAT IS ASSOCIATED WITH USING RACE.

>> Braude: BEFORE WE HEAR WHAT NATASHA THINKS ABOUT YOUR PROPOSAL YOU'RE SAYING YOUR PIECE IN THE GLOBE, AGAIN YOU ASSERT AS YOU DID A SECOND AGO THAT DIVERSITY IS ESSENTIAL, YOU TWO AGREE ON THAT SOME YOU SAY IT IS PROMPT TO USE RACE IF OTHER MEANS COULD NOT ACHIEVE SUFFICIENT DIVERSITY.

BUT THE PLAINTIFFS WITH WHOM YOU ARE TECHG DON'T AGREE WITH THAT AT ALL CORRECT?

>> THAT'S RIGHT, I HAVE A DIFFERENT POSITION FROM STUDENTS PREPARED ADMISSION.

IN THE VAST MAJORITY OF CASES WILL WORK SO YOU WON'T HAVE TO USE RACE.

BUT IF THERE WERE AN UNUSUAL CIRCUMSTANCE WHERE LET'S SAY AN INSTITUTION WAS LOCATED IN, YOU KNOW, AN ALL WHITE STATE WHERE IT WAS HARD TO GET BLACK APPLICANTS TO APPLY AND THEY DID EVERYTHING THEY COULD THROUGH RACE KNEW TRARL ALTERNATIVES, THEN I'D LEAVE THE DOOR OPEN A CRACK IN NOTICES CIRCUMSTANCES.

>> Braude: NATASHA WHAT DO YOU THINK OF RICHARD ALTERNATIVES TO ACHIEVE THE SAME END?

>> LET ME FIRST SAY I AGREE WITH RICHARD THAT ABSOLUTELY THESE COLLEGES NEED TO BE PAYING A LOT MORE ATTENTION TO CLASS AND THEY NEED MORE CLASS DIVERSITY.

THERE ARE A DERGT OF DEARTH OF STUDENTS WHO ARE IN THAT SOCIAL CLASS.

BUT THE EVIDENCE SUGGESTS EVEN IF WE LOOK AT CLASS THERE ARE MORE YOUNG PEOPLE WHO ARE POOR, MORE OF OUR POOR ARE WHITE THAN ARE BLACK, OR LATINX BECAUSE THAT IS THE POPULATION OF THE UNITED STATES.

THAT ATTENTION TO CLASS IS NOT ENOUGH TO ACHIEVE RACIAL DIVERSITY, ENDING LEGACY ADMISSIONS, REDUCING OUR ENDING ATHLETIC RECRUITING ALL OF THE OTHER FACTORS THAT WERE MENTIONED AT COURT TODAY.

THE DATA SUGGESTS THAT CAME FROM A CASE THAT THESE ARE, YOU KNOW, THAT THESE WILL NOT BE SUFFICIENT TO ACHIEVE THE RACIAL DIVERSITY THAT AFFIRMATIVE ACTION DOES AND THAT'S PRETTY CLEAR.

ABSOLUTELY I THINK WE SHOULD BE PAYING A LOT MORE ATTENTION TO CLASS BUT THAT'S NOT A STAND-IN FOR RACE.

AND I THINK WE NEED TO LOOK AT BOTH OF THESE THINGS.

IT IS NOT EITHER-OR, TO ME IT'S BOTH-AND.

>> Braude: HOW ABOUT IT RICHARD?

>> SO IN THEORY I AGREE THAT I COULD SEE A WORLD IN WHICH UNIVERSITIES CONSIDERED SOCIOECONOMIC STATUS ALONGSIDE OF RACE.

I'VE BEEN AT THIS 30 YEARS, THOUGH.

AND THE ONE TIME THAT UNIVERSITIES START PAYING ATTENTION TO CLASS DIVERSITY IS WHEN THEY TOOL TO RECRUIT USE RACE TO RECRUIT UPPER MIDDLE CLASS STUDENTS OF COLOR IS TAKEN AWAY.

SO IN CALIFORNIA, IN MICHIGAN, IN WASHINGTON STATE, IN TEXAS, FLORIDA, THAT'S WHEN THEY REALLY STARTED PAYING ATTENTION TO CLASS, WHEN THEY COULD NO LONGER USE RACE.

AND IT WAS ONLY THEN.

SO IN THEORY, UNIVERSITIES COULD DO RACE ALONGSIDE CLASS.

THEY NEVER DO THOUGH IN FACT BECAUSE IT IS MUCH CHEAPER FOR A UNIVERSITY TO GIVE PREFERENCES TO UPPER MIDDLE CLASS STUDENTS OF COLOR.

THAT'S WHAT HARVARD DOES, 75% OF -- 71% OF THE DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS ARE ECONOMICALLY ADVANTAGED.

SO THE WAY TO GET TO PATH AND CLASS AND RACIAL DIVERSITY IS TO USE SOCIOECONOMIC STATUS AS A WAY OF MOVING FORWARD.

>> Braude: THE ONE THING YOU BOTH DON'T SEEM TO AGREE ON BUT DO AGREE ON IS THAT RACIAL DIVERSITY MATTERS.

I HEAR COMMENTS FROM CLARENCE JUSTICE THOMAS, ONE OF MY LEAST FAVORITE THINGS IS WHEN SMART PEOPLE PLAY CLUELESS AND HE DID THAT TODAY.

I HAVE HEARD THE WORD DIVERSITY QUITE A FEW TIMES, I DON'T HAVE A CLUE WHAT I MEANS, HE SAYS, STARTING WITH YOU NATASHA, MAYBE IT'S NECESSARY TO DO THAT, YOU TOUCH ON IT AT THE TOP, WHY DOES DIVERSITY MATTER, WHY IN THE BIG PICTURE DOES IT MATTER?

>> WELL, YOU KNOW, AFTER THE BACHI DECISION IN THE LATE 1970s A LOT OF SOCIAL CONSISTENCY WENT TO TASK AND SAID WHAT ARE THE BENEFITS OF A DIVERSE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT?

WE SEE THAT THERE ARE STUDENTS WHO ARE ON MORE RACIALLY DIVERSE CAMPUSES FEEL A BETTER SENSE OF SELF EFFICACY.

WE KNOW THAT DIVERSE GROUPS MAKE BETTER DECISIONS OR BETTER AT SOLVING PROBLEMS.

THEY FIND DOWN THE LINE THAT THERE IS GREATER CIVIC PARTICIPATION, GREATER SENSE OF EFFICACY IN TERMS OF LEADERSHIP.

SO STRONG BETTER RACIAL ATTITUDES.

SO WE KNOW THAT THERE ARE ALL OF THESE BENEFITS.

AND I'LL JUST POINT OUT ALSO THAT WE CAN LOOK AT WHAT HAPPENS WHEN WE END AFFIRMATIVE ACTION BY LOOKING AT STATES AS YOU MENTIONED RICHARD LIKE CALIFORNIA, MICHIGAN, TEXAS, AND IT'S NOT GOOD.

UNDERREPRESENTED MINORITIES IN THESE CAMPUSES, THERE ARE NEW YORK DOWN EFFECTS ON GRADUATE SCHOOLS, THOSE STUDENTS ARE THEN LESS LIKELY TO GRADUATE COLLEGE AND GO ON TO GRADUATE SCHOOL.

THERE ARE FEW DOCTORS OF COLOR WHO ARE BLACK HISPANIC OR NATIVE AMERICAN.

WE KNOW THE SAME RACE DOCTOR HAS AN IMPACT ON BLACK PATIENT CARE.

THERE ARE ALL OF THESE REASONS WHY WE ALREADY KNOW WHAT WILL HAPPEN AND IT DOESN'T LOOK GOOD.

SO I THINK SUGGESTING THAT THEY'LL FIND CLASS BASED ALTERNATIVES HASN'T BEEN THE CASE SO FAR.

>> Braude: YOU KNOW RICHARD YOU HAVE THERE BENEFIT THAT NEITHER OF US DO, WE BOTH READ OF IT, NEITHER OFFERS WERE IN THE COURTROOM, YOU WERE.

MEDIA SUGGESTS, COURT OBSERVERS SUGGEST FRIFERTION IS GONE AS SOON AS THE DECISION IS WRITTEN.

YOU SHARE THAT PERSPECTIVE BASED ON THE ORAL ARGUMENT?

>> NO, GOING IN WE KNEW IT WAS 6 TO 3 A CONSERVATIVE-LIBERAL DIVIDE.

AND THERE WASN'T ANYTHING THAT I HEARD FROM ANY OF THE CONSERVATIVE JUSTICES THAT SUGGESTED THAT THEY REALLY LIKE THE STATUS QUO AND WERE READY TO SUPPORT HARVARD AND UNC.

I THINK THERE'S -- I SEE A MUCH BRIGHTER FUTURE THAN NATASHA DOES ON THIS.

>> Braude: WHY.

>> MY READING THE EVIDENCE IN PLACES LIKE CALIFORNIA, UCLA TO TAKE ONE EXAMPLE, UCLA IS 6% AFRICAN AMERICAN.

IN A STATE THAT'S 7% AFRICAN AMERICAN.

U NFERLTC WHICH USES RACE HAS AN -- UNC WHICH USES RATE IN A STATE THAT IS 22% BLACK, UCLA IS DOING PRETTY WELL IN TERMS OF FINDING RACE NEUTRAL WAYS TO GET RACIAL DIVERSITY.

AND ON TOP OF THAT, UCLA, U.C.

BERKELEY, THESE INSTITUTIONS ARE AMONG THE TOP TWO FOR SOCIOECONOMIC DIVERSITY.

SO THEY ARE ABLE TO ACCOMPLISH BOTH GOALS.

AND TO THEIR CREDIT HIGHER EDUCATION IS DEDICATED TO RACIAL DIVERSITY.

AND WHEN THEY -- WHEN IF TOOLS ARE TAKEN AWAY YOU KNOW THE KIND OF BLUNTEST TOOLS, FREEFERG WEALTH STUDENTS WEALTHY STUDENTS OF COLOR, I READ THOSE STORIES AS MUCH MORE SUCCESSFUL THAN SOME HAVE ACTUALLY GUESSED.

>> Braude: NATASHA IF THE RESULT IS A 6 TO 3 OR 5 TO 4 DECISION, DUMPING AFFIRMATIVE ACTION AS A CONSIDERATION OR SAYING THAT IT CAN'T CONSTITUTIONALLY BE CONSIDERED AS A FACTOR, WHAT DO YOU SEE IN THE FUTURE?

>> SO LET ME JUST SAY THAT YOU KNOW I THINK IT'S NOT A DONE-DEAL.

I THINK THERE WERE A LOT OF QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS, LIKE WHEN DOES IT END.

AND I THINK AMY COMEY BARRETT ASKED, WHAT ABOUT THAT JUSTICE MENTIONED IN 2003 OR WHEN IS IT, I THINK THERE IS AN OPENING THERE, SO I DON'T KNOW THAT IT'S, YOU KNOW -- I DON'T KNOW THAT IT'S A DONE DEAL.

WE'LL HAVE TO -- >> Braude: LET'S ASSUME IT IS JUST FOR ARGUMENT'S SAKE.

>> I THINK IT'S NOT GOOD AND AGAIN I THINK WE CAN LOOK AT STATES THAT HAVE BANNED AFFIRMATIVE ACTION TO SEE WHAT WOULD HAPPEN.

I THINK WE'LL SEE A DECLINE AND WE WILL DEFINITELY SEE A DECLINE IN BLACK, LATINO AND AFRICAN AMERICAN, I THINK IT WILL BE HARD PERHAPS THEY WILL PIVOT TO ASKING PEOPLE TO TALK MORE ABOUT THEIR BIOGRAPHY, BECAUSE IT WAS INTERESTING THAT THE PLAINTIFFS SAID THAT, YOU KNOW, YOU COULD CONSIDER RACE IF A PERSON TALKS ABOUT RACE BASED DISCRIMINATION OR DIVERSITY OR EVEN JUST CULTURAL IDENTITY AND IT HAPPENS TO BE OKAY.

>> Braude: THAT WAS CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS TODAY I BELIEVE?

>> CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS AND IS SSFA LAWYER AS WELL.

>> Braude: ONE LAST THING IF I MAY, MAYBE THIS IS MORE APPROPRIATE FOR YOU RICHARD, IF NOT, ONE OF THE THINGS I CAN'T QUITE FIGURE OUT IS HOW A MAN WHO ADMITS THAT HE BENEFITED FROM AFFIRMATIVE ACTION AT HIM CROSS AND BENEFITED FROM AFFIRMATIVE ACTION AT YALE LAW SCHOOL IS PROBABLY THE MOST POWERFUL OPPONENT OF AFFIRMATIVE ACTION AS AN OLDER MAN, THAT OF COURSE WOULD BE ASSOCIATE JUSTICE THOMAS.

DO YOU HAVE ANY INSIGHT INTO WHY IT WAS GOOD FOR HIM BUT NOT GOOD FOR THOSE AFTER HIM?

>> WELL, I -- I THINK IT'S DANGEROUS TO SPECULATE.

BUT I WOULD SAY THAT THERE ARE BENEFICIARIES OF RACED BASED AFFIRMATIVE ACTION WHO ARE RESENTFUL THAT THEIR MEANINGFUL ACCOMPLISHMENTS ARE UNDER A CLOUD.

AND SO TO THE EXTENT THAT THIS PLAYS INTO JUSTICE THOMAS'S VIEWS ON AFFIRMATIVE ACTION I THINK IT'S PERFECTLY LOGICAL AND REASONABLE FOR SOMEONE WHOSE ACCOMPLISHMENTS ARE DOUBTED BECAUSE OF RACE BASED PREFERENCES WOULD SAY MAYBE THERE'S A BETTER WAY.

AND HE IS A VERY STRONG CHAMPION BHEA OF SOCIOECONOMIC PREFERENCES.

THE YOUNG CLARENCE THOMAS DID DESERVE A SOCIOECONOMIC PREFERENCE IN ADMISSION.

NOW -- >> Braude: BUT HE GOT A RACIAL PREFERENCE.

>> RIGHT BUT I'M SAYING THE NEXT GENERATION WOULDN'T NECESSARILY.

OBAMA HAS SAID THAT HIS KIDS DON'T DESERVE A LEG UP IN ADMISSIONS.

BUT LOTS OF THE BENEFICIARIES OF SOCIOECONOMIC PREFERENCES WILL BE PEOPLE LIKE THE YOUNG CLARENCE THOMAS.

>> Braude: NATASHA DO YOU HAVE ANY QUICK INSIGHT ON THAT?

>> I CAN ONLY SPECULATE WHAT GOES THROUGH JUSTICE THOMAS'S MIND.

I THINK THAT HE -- I DON'T KNOW WHAT HE WOULD SAY.

I THINK HE'S PRETTY OPPOSED TO ANY KIND OF CONSIDERATION OF RACE AND I THINK THE QUESTION HE KEPT ASKING, WHAT IS DIVERSITY, WHAT IS THE BENEFIT, FELT A BIT DISINGENUOUS BECAUSE THERE IS ALL OF THIS RESEARCH ON THE BENEFITS OF A DIVERSE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT FOR STUDENTS SO -- >> Braude: NATASHA I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME, RICHARD, I APPRECIATE YOU COMING IN SORT OF FROM OUT OF THE RAIN.

THANKS FOR YOUR TIME, I REALLY APPRECIATE IT.

>> THANK YOU BYE-BYE.

THAT'S IT FOR TONIGHT.

WE'LL BE BACK TOMORROW.

THANKS FOR WATCHING, AND PLEASE DON'T FORGET UKRAINE.

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ >> IN NEWTON, MASSACHUSETTS, THERE'S A STAR MARKET THAT OVERHANGS THE MASS TURNPIKE.

AND, I WAS CURIOUS WHY THAT WAS?

>> I'M EDGAR B. HERWICK III, AND THIS IS THE "CURIOSITY DESK."

WELL, WE START THINGS OFF TODAY IN A PLACE THAT I AM CONFIDENT IS FAMILIAR TO YOU ALL-- A SUPERMARKET.

THIS ONE IS A LOT LIKE ANY OTHER.

THE COFFEE'S NEAR THE TEA, THE BUTTER'S NEAR THE MILK, AND THE SHELVES ARE STOCKED WITH AN ABUNDANCE OF OPTIONS.

NOW, EVEN IF YOU'VE NEVER BEEN INSIDE, YOU'VE LIKELY DRIVEN UNDER THIS GUY.

AND WHILE THE BUILDING ITSELF DATES TO THE 1960s, ITS STORY BEGINS ALMOST HALF A CENTURY PRIOR.

>> THE STAR MARKET BEGAN IN WATERTOWN.

THE FIRST ONE OPENED IN 1915.

>> THAT'S CLARA SILVERSTEIN WITH "HISTORIC NEWTON."

>> THE OWNER WAS NAMED SARKIS MUGAR, AND HE WAS FROM ARMENIA.

>> SARKIS HELMED THE WATERTOWN STAR MARKET UNTIL 1922.

WHEN HE DIED FOLLOWING AN AUTOMOBILE ACCIDENT, HIS SON STEVEN TOOK OVER THE STORE AND IN 1930, OPENED A SECOND STAR MARKET RIGHT HERE IN NEWTONVILLE.

BUT THE BOLDEST LEAP CAME IN 1948, WITH THE STAR MARKET'S FIRST SUPERMARKET.

BUT STAR MARKET WAS IMMEDIATELY ON A COLLISION COURSE WITH THE LATEST THING IN ROADS-- THE MODERN HIGHWAY.

>> MORE AND MORE AND MORE CARS.

>> THE TURNPIKE AUTHORITY WANTED TO GO THROUGH NEWTONVILLE AND TAKE OVER THE STAR MARKET'S PARKING LOT.

>> THE TURNPIKE AUTHORITY GOT ITS ROUTE, AND THE MUGARS WERE GRANTED THE AIR RIGHTS TO BUILD A NEW STORE ON TOP OF THE NEW TURNPIKE.

THE SUCCESS OF THE STAR MARKET PROJECT FUELED THE IMAGINATIONS OF DEVELOPERS AND CITY LEADERS, WHO SAW A FUTURE WITH GLEAMING BUILDINGS OVER THE PIKE.

IN REALITY, NOTHING HAS BEEN BUILT WITH AIR RIGHTS WEST OF THE CITY IN ALMOST 50 YEARS.

AND SO, IT STANDS OVER THE PIKE TODAY, A NOD TO NEWTON'S PAST, AND TO AN IMAGINED FUTURE THAT NEVER CAME TO PASS.

I'M EDGAR B. HERWICK III.

STAY CURIOUS OUT THERE.

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪