Like Justice Sotomayor, the New Yorker’s Jeffrey Toobin seems to think that the continued existence of racism—including the vile rantings of Cliven Bundy and Donald Sterling—bears meaningfully on the question whether Michigan’s ban on racial preferences is constitutionally permissible. Even worse, he baselessly attributes to the justices in the majority in Schuette v. BAMN—last week’s ruling on Michigan’s Proposal 2—an “insist[ence]” that racial discrimination is “ancient history.” (The quotes Toobin offers don’t remotely support his characterization.)