& et all. 2008). The firm Gonzales Construction Company which had also submitted a competing yet higher bid was chosen over Adarand because "Gonzales is certified as a small business controlled by socially and economically disadvantaged individuals" (Reed, O. & et all. 2008). Adarand was not certified as such and as a result their bid while lowest was not awarded. What is the conflict between the opinions in Croson and Metro Broadcasting?

The Croson and Metro cases examine the treatment of race- based preferences at the state and local level and at the federal level. Under Croson, the Court held that while "a city's determination that 30% of its contracting work should go to minority owned businesses" (Reed, O. &...

2008) was in their legislative domain to "eradicate the effects of private discrimination within its own jurisdiction" (Reed, O. & et all. 2008).; the constitutionality of such programs must meet "a single standard of strict scrutiny for racial classification" (Reed, O. & et all. 2008). The city's actions then did not pass the strict scrutiny test as "the program is not narrowly tailored to remedy the effects of prior discrimination" (Reed, O. & et all. 2008).
With a strict scrutiny test as mandatory for all state and local government race- based preferences, the question still remained how a federal racial preference standard would be interpreted. The assumption would be that "it would be unthinkable that the same