so that's the issue in the case. >> joshua thompson, what's your position? >> the position i worked, the 9th circuit court of appeals, on challenges that were identical, saying the political process is trying to be restructured on race based preferences. i agree that it is about structure and how the political process was or was not altered. my belief is that you do not violate the equal protection clause by banning racial preferences. in other words, the equal protection clause was designed as a measure to end racial discrimination and preferential treatment. what proposition 2 and proposition 209 in california does, it prohibits outright the use of racial considerations in government decision-making. >>ifill: is this about racial preferences and legacy preferences, not another issue? >> that is certainly the argument that is put forth by the opponents of proposal 2. and my response to that is that we have a long history in this country of why we treat racial matters differently. we have a history of know that distinctions on the basis of race are divisive,