Because the &quot;no black people&quot; limit is abusive, in large part <i>intended</i> to be abusive, and has no good-faith public policy purpose, and the other limits can&#x27;t be described that way.<p>You can describe them as erroneous or ineffective --- the way you could describe virtually any regulation --- but you can&#x27;t make <i>that</i> argument about them.<p>Since this distinction seems pretty obvious, I have to wonder why you&#x27;d pretend not to see it.