There was a time when our guest was a diversity skeptic.  He actually believed that Justice Clarence Thomas’s thinking on the matter had some validity.  Then he began to explore the history of the concept and became a true admirer of the benefits that diversity brings to academic settings, the workplace, science laboratories and all manner of activity.  From that he began a thoughtful examination of the science behind the benefits of having previously excluded groups as part of the conversation and decision-making process.  And while some argued that simply by using the Socratic Method of challenging convention you could get enough diverse opinions, he began to recognize, as other scholars like Wilhelm von Humboldt and John Stuart Mill did in the 19th century and Charles Eliot, Archibald Cox and Lewis Powell did in the 20th century, that you actually needed people with different backgrounds and life experiences to provide the rich diversity of thought that resulted in better scholarship and outcomes.  America’s adaption of diversity in action over the last 50 years seemed to suggest we understood that, so now why the backsliding?  We discuss this all today with Berkeley law professor, David Oppenheimer.  He is the author of the new book, “The Diversity Principle: The Story of a Transformative Idea.”

Episode 85 opens by drawing a clear line between traditional voter ID laws — which most Americans already support and easily satisfy — and the SAVE Act’s stricter requirement for documentary proof of citizenship. The hour unpacks the political, constitutional, and logistical stakes of that shift, framing the bill as a national fight over access, federal power, and who ultimately gets to participate in American democracy. The hour concludes with an interview featuring Prof. David B. Oppenheimer, a Clinical Professor of Law at Berkeley Law and one of the world’s leading scholars on discrimination, civil rights, and comparative equality law. He is the author of The Diversity Principle: The Story of a Transformative Idea, a sweeping historical and legal examination of how diversity became a defining framework in American public life.

Diversity has become a political weapon—but what if it was never meant to be political at all? UC Berkeley law professor David Oppenheimer argues in our conversation that diversity is an intellectual principle, not a moral slogan or corporate checkbox. Drawing on history, law, and hard science, he explains why diverse perspectives drive better thinking—and how the idea got lost along the way.