Supreme Court to revisit affirmative action policies

[Geee]

The Hill:

The Supreme Court will revisit the use of race in determining college admissions Wednesday in a case that experts say could have important implications for affirmative action policies at public universities around the country.

 

Opponents of such policies are bullish about the prospects of a win in Fisher v. the University of Texas, particularly with a justice from the court’s liberal wing sitting out the case.

 

 

“I think the issue of race as a factor in college admission is on its way out,” said Thomas Fitton, president of Judicial Watch, a conservative foundation that filed a brief in the case.

The case stems from a lawsuit Abigail Fisher filed against the school after she was denied admission in 2008. Fisher, a white woman, argued that UT’s consideration of race in its admissions process violated the Equal Protection Clause under the 14th Amendment, particularly because state law guarantees admission to students who graduate in the top 10 percent of their high school classes.

Fisher argues that the policy is sufficient to help UT achieve diversity, but the school disagrees.

“She has a dim view of success and diversity,” the university said in court documents, arguing that Fisher’s case “ignores the significant blow to diversity in the broad and qualitative sense … that comes from selecting a class based on one factor (class rank), and nothing else.”

Those in support of UT’s policy argue that relying only on rankings promotes segregation.

 

[Draggingtree]

Wednesday round-up

By Amy Howe on Dec 9, 2015 at 6:54 am

Coverage of and commentary on the Court focus on today’s oral arguments in Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin, the challenge to the University of Texas at Austin’s consideration of race in its undergraduate admissions process. Lyle Denniston previewed the case for this blog, with other coverage coming from Mark Walsh for Education Week, Samantha Ostrom and Kelsey Ferguson for Cornell’s Legal Information Institute, and Adam Liptak and Emily Bazelon in The New York Times Magazine. Commentary comes from David Rivkin and Andrew Grossman at National Review, Daniel Hemel at The University of Chicago Law School Faculty Blog, Charles Kelbley at The Legal Intelligencer, Risa Kaufman at theHuman Rights at Home Blog, and Joseph Bear at Adventures in Doctrinal Wonderland. And atHamilton and Griffin on Rights, Ruben Garcia discusses the role of social science data in the case, while in an op-ed for the Los Angeles Times Richard Kahlenberg argues in favor of class-based, rather than race-based, affirmative action.Continue reading »

http://www.scotusblog.com/2015/12/wednesday-round-up-298/

[Draggingtree]

Breaking News :

The race-conscious admissions program in use at the time of Fisher's application by the University of Texas is lawful under the Equal Protection Clause (opinion here).

[Draggingtree]

U.S. Supreme Court Upholds UT-Austin's Affirmative Action System

by Matthew Watkins / June 23, 2016 / 1Comment

The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday upheld the University of Texas at Austin's ability to give a slight boost in the admissions process to black and Hispanic applicants, a decision that once again preserved the use of affirmative action at American universities.

FULL STORY