Supreme Court Revisits Case That Could Cripple Affirmative Action

The court is weighing for the second time a challenge to the system used by the University of Texas at Austin, the state’s flagship public university, brought by a white applicant, Abigail Fisher, who was denied entry to the entering class of 2008. But he told students and faculty at the University of Hawaii’s law school on Monday, Feb. 3, 2014, the case came during a time of panic about the war.

The court’s decision in Fisher v. the University of Texas at Austin, expected sometime next year, could have a transformative effect on how students get into college, in Texas and across the country. Black students are underrepresented by at least 20 percent at 79 percent of the country’s research universities; only two research universities in states with affirmative action bans have at least the same proportion of black students as the state’s college-age population, and one of those, Florida A&M University, is a historically black college or university (HBCU).

This morning, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in the case of Evenwel v. Abbott, a huge case about a fundamental question that goes to the very heart of our Constitution’s system of representative democracy. And several justices appeared skeptical of the university’s procedures. They say additional factors – including race – should be considered.

Fisher says it is unfair, and that it cost her a slot in the university of her choice. Further complicating odds makers’ predictions is the recusal of Justice Elena Kagan, who won’t hear the case given her prior role as Harvard Law School dean yielding a conflict of interest.

January 31, 2007 – After the Supreme Court sends the case back to district court, the case is dismissed.

Following are major Supreme Court decisions affecting university affirmative action. After sitting on the matter for eight months, the case agreed that campus diversity was important to maintain, but sent the case to the lower Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals for review.

“UT failed to show that its pre-existing race-neutral admissions program could not achieve the desired level of diversity”, her lawyers argued in court papers.

On Wednesday, some conservative justices seemed to agree.

The University of Texas, carefully threading that needle, devised a policy guaranteeing admission to high school students graduating in the top 10 percent of their class. The university also considers athletics and other extracurricular activities – as well as ethnicity. He added: “I don’t know what the basis for that is”. “Really, it’s based on a bad stereotyping”, said Alito.

Affirmative action certainly isn’t the only solution to the problem, the companies said, but a “full court press” is needed to address the lack of diversity in STEM fields, the brief states. The justices said that the lower court had deferred too much to the school’s claims of good faith in its use of race in admissions, and they ordered the lower court to determine whether the university’s use of race was as limited as possible in order to attain a diverse student body.

The Top 10 program is inadequate, he said, because it is a blunt instrument and a product of widespread segregation in Texas high schools.

Meanwhile, Justice Sonia Sotomayor raised questions about whether UT-Austin’s consideration of race was all that unique. “Will every school have to use the 10% plan?”

At another point, Roberts said, “It is called ‘one-person, one-vote.’ That seems to be created to protect voters”.

The conservative-leaning Supreme Court has previously ruled against racial remedies in voting, employment and other areas of the law. After oral arguments concluded, both sides said they felt confident about the case.

“UT has never been clear about precisely why it needs to use racial preferences”, says Bert Rein, a Washington, DC lawyer representing the opponents.

1964 – The Civil Rights Act renders discrimination illegal in the workplace.