This article demonstrates the incomplete logic and inconsistent legal reasoning used in the argument against affirmative action. The phrase "two wrongs don't make a right" is often heard in addressing various attempts to equalize, to balance, and to correct the acknowledged wrongs of slavery and segregation and their derivative effects. Yet, "two wrongs do/can make a right" has a positive connotation. This article reviews the history of societal and judicial wrongs against Blacks, as well as the evolution of the narrowing in legal reasoning concerning discrimination against minorities, including Blacks. Next, the legal reasoning behind legacy programs will be reviewed to show the inconsistency with the rationale against affirmative action in the area of discrimination against Blacks. The article then takes a brief look at the philosophy behind slavery and suppression, the first "wrong," and the possible remedy of affirmative action, the alleged "second wrong." Finally, it concludes with a review of legal analysis in areas where "two wrongs do make a right."
John C. Duncan, Jr., Two "Wrongs" Do/Can Make a Right: Remembering Mathematics, Physics, & Various Legal Analogies (Two Negatives Make a Positive; Are Remedies Wrong?) The Law Has Made Him Equal, But Man Has Not, 43 Brandeis L.J. 511 (2005)