1st para: because reservation is not a poverty alleviation scheme? And no, if children of communities are actually lacking in representation, they can be classified under SC/ST/OBC too and get the affirmative action rights. The criteria for reservation is far more holistic than under the EWS criteria, which is patently unjust. Or as the minority judgement said, it threatens to tear apart the social fabric of equality.
2nd para: 'trans-formative constitutionalism' is a tool for constitutional interpretation. According to it, you do not take the most base view prevalent in the society and act according to it. You take into consideration the the constitutional ideals. Matrimonial advertisements should not carry casteist or communal preferences upfront. These advertisements are for the public and reasonable restriction are important.
3rd para: assuming he does not support any idea that only a priest born into a certain caste can perform holy functions, it was a public event and she should have stopped it. The public space are not reserved for casteism.
And I am assuming that you agree that she is incorrect on "facts" about Dr Ambedkar's statement and her proposition that reservations should end (you want them for all communities, right?) is baseless.
Regarding your point about matrimonial websites, yes it certainly makes all those people communal. That's the very definition. Communalism is not restricted within one religion or faith. With regard to Trivedi's decision, the problem is that the EWS also leaves out poor reserved category students! Based on your own argument, if the reserved seats get taken by the rich SC/ST/OBC students (which actually does not always happen in reality as per any scientific study actually conducted), and the poor Savarna people take up the EWS seats, then what happens to the poor Dalits? If it is only based on economic criterion, then it makes no sense to exclude anyone who qualifies on the basis of that criterion. Or else don't call it EWS, but poor Savarna reservation.
2nd para: 'trans-formative constitutionalism' is a tool for constitutional interpretation. According to it, you do not take the most base view prevalent in the society and act according to it. You take into consideration the the constitutional ideals. Matrimonial advertisements should not carry casteist or communal preferences upfront. These advertisements are for the public and reasonable restriction are important.
3rd para: assuming he does not support any idea that only a priest born into a certain caste can perform holy functions, it was a public event and she should have stopped it. The public space are not reserved for casteism.
And I am assuming that you agree that she is incorrect on "facts" about Dr Ambedkar's statement and her proposition that reservations should end (you want them for all communities, right?) is baseless.
With regard to Trivedi's decision, the problem is that the EWS also leaves out poor reserved category students! Based on your own argument, if the reserved seats get taken by the rich SC/ST/OBC students (which actually does not always happen in reality as per any scientific study actually conducted), and the poor Savarna people take up the EWS seats, then what happens to the poor Dalits? If it is only based on economic criterion, then it makes no sense to exclude anyone who qualifies on the basis of that criterion. Or else don't call it EWS, but poor Savarna reservation.