Divided Court Revists Fisher v. UT

As Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia’s retirement does not seem imminent, a University of Wisconsin-Madison research assistant is hoping for his death.

The U.S. Supreme Court appeared divided Wednesday after oral arguments were presented in a case that could spell an end to affirmative action programs at schools and colleges nationwide.

Justice Antonin Scalia hinted the University of Texas may be admitting too many blacks, suggesting they belong in “slower track” schools.

Scalia’s argument, which provoked a firestorm on Wednesday, was rooted in “mismatch theory”, which suggests an ill-fit between the country’s elite universities and minority students who are unprepared for the academic rigor that the schools demand.

“Maybe it ought to have fewer”, he said. Black or African-American students make up approximately four-percent of the UT-Austin undergraduate body.

“I think what experience shows…is that now is not the time and this is not the case to roll back student-body diversity in America”.

The answer will nearly surely be provided by Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, who has never upheld a race-conscious plan such as the one being challenged in this case from the University of Texas at Austin. Fisher contends that she would have made the cut if 100 percent of the class had been admitted under the “top 10” rule, a contention the university denies.

He also said the idea that black students should be pushed out of top universities is “unacceptable”.

Justices heard arguments from attorneys representing the University of Texas and Abigail Fisher, a woman who says she was refused admission to the Austin school in 2008 in part because she is Caucasian. Affirmative action was used as a “temporary” measure to increase at the university but as Roberts once again pointed out, “When do you think your program will be done?”

Wednesday’s arguments were about whether the University of Texas has compelling reasons to consider race among other factors when it evaluates applicants for about a quarter of its freshman class.

“The idea is that if a student is admitted to a school they are not academically prepared for then they will not perform up to their own potential”, Severino said.

After a comment like this, Court watchers will really be looking forward to his opinion in the case. The specific brief in question was written by a conservative lawyer, Gail Heriot, who has previously argued against anti-discrimination policies in her position at the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.

The court’s ruling on the Fisher case is expected in June 2016.

“Colleges and universities across the nation have always been addressing questions surrounding race and ethnicity”, he said. Justice Elena Kagan was recused due to her prior job as Solicitor General.