Ruling signals ‘yellow light’ on college affirmative action

“As the College has become more diverse, every marker of student excellence has continued to rise”.

In a 4-3 decision, the Court chose to reject the challenge to the University’s policy, brought forward by Abigail Fisher, a white woman who claimed the University discriminated against her based on her race, and subsequently denied her admittance to the University.

But the ruling was an unexpected surprise for minority groups and advocates of affirmative action. However, applicant like Fisher can still get admission if they can score high on the evaluations that school will be giving them.

We recall the Fisher case began in 2008 when plaintiffs Abigail Noel Fisher and Rachel Multer Michaelwicz were denied of admission to the University of Texas when they applied. “[I] t remains an enduring challenge to our Nation’s education system to reconcile the pursuit of diversity with the constitutional promise of equal treatment and dignity”, Justice Kennedy noted in his opinion, warning against “elusory or amorphous” diversity goals.

Hicks also predicted that any hope of reversing or limiting Thursday’s decision is dismal in light of the 2016 presidential race landscape.

University officials contend that having a sizable number of minorities enrolled exposes students to varied perspectives and enhances the educational experience for all students.

President Barack Obama praised the decision, saying it doesn’t guarantee equal outcomes but promotes equal opportunities.

Civil rights groups hailed the ruling, saying such programs provide a foundation for achieving equality throughout US society.

“I am thrilled and gratified by today’s ruling”, Mr. Fenves said in a statement. The plan automatically accepts Texas students who graduate in the top 10 percent of their high school classes, and supporters say it ensures diversity despite high school segregation.

“It is a part of each student, it is their reality, looking at their race among other factors, such as class and gender is what universities ought to do and what they are now permitted to do legally”, she says.

The University of Texas school president has issued a statement regarding the Supreme Court’s decision on the Fisher Case.

The school’s critics claim that the University of Texas failed to identify clear goals for its program and metrics to demonstrate that it is achieving them – a hard assignment, given the court’s objection to strictly numerical targets.

The twist: “Nationally, it was a very unique case because Texas is the only state with the Top 10 Percent rule with the holistic, race-based program on top of it” said Bloom.

Last fall, IU and seven other universities filed an amicus (“friend of the court”) brief in support of the University of Texas, which has been in a legal battle for seven years and appeared twice before the Supreme Court arguing the validity of its admissions process.

In his dissent Justice Samuel Alito said “the university had not demonstrated the need for race-based admissions” and that its program benefited advantaged students over impoverished ones.

The nation’s high court has struck down racial quotas, declaring them to be unconstitutional.

“These are laudable goals, but they are not concrete or precise and they offer no limiting principle for the use of racial preferences”, he wrote in a dissent joined by Justice Clarence Thomas and Chief Justice John Roberts. Justice Elena Kagan had recused herself.

The majority opinion, by Justice Anthony Kennedy, makes clear that upholding the admissions policy “does not necessarily mean the University may rely on that same policy without refinement”.