The Supreme Court is set to examine whether Brahmins can be considered "politically backward". This comes amid ongoing debates about caste-based discrimination and reservations in India.

The question of whether a historically privileged caste can also experience disadvantages in the political sphere is complex. Some argue that the concept of "caste-based discrimination" should not be limited to Scheduled Castes (SC), Scheduled Tribes (ST), and Other Backward Classes (OBC). They contend that excluding general category students from protections against caste-based discrimination violates Article 14 of the Constitution.

Recent incidents, such as the defacement of walls at Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) with anti-Brahmin slogans, have highlighted the discrimination faced by Brahmins. However, others believe that extending the definition of backwardness to include historically privileged castes undermines the purpose of reservation policies, which were designed to uplift marginalized communities.

The Supreme Court has previously emphasized that caste should not be the sole determinant of backwardness. It has also acknowledged that reservations were initially intended to help suppressed castes compete in a democratic India but were not meant to be a permanent fixture.

The debate also brings up the representation of Brahmins in the judiciary. There have been periods where Brahmins were over-represented in the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court's examination of this issue is significant because it could have far-reaching implications for reservation policies and the understanding of social justice in India. The court's decision will likely be based on a careful consideration of historical injustices, contemporary realities, and the constitutional principles of equality and social justice.