University of Texas at Austin anticipating U.S. Supreme Court ruling -Fisher v. University of Texas

University of Texas at Austin anticipating U.S. Supreme Court ruling -Fisher v. University of Texas
The Future of Affirmative Action in Higher Ed

University of Texas -Austin

Source: University of Texas at Austin

AUSTIN, Texas — The Supreme Court of the United States is expected to issue a series of opinions Monday morning and could release its decision in the case of Fisher v. University of Texas. UT Austin will review the ruling as soon as it is released and issue a public response as quickly as possible.

If it does not do so Monday, the Supreme Court could issue its ruling on June 17 or 24, 2013.

UPDATE:
No ruling on Fisher v. Texas today June 10, 2013. More opinions could come this Thursday.

___________
Video: Dallas Attorney Tom Brandt Discusses UT Affirmative Action Policy Before the Supreme Court

_____________
Video: Fisher v. University of Texas – Background

____________
Video: University of Texas-Austin President: Diversity ‘Benefits’ All
October 10, 2012

____________

US Supreme Court

Fisher v. University of Texas

No. 11-345
Title:
Abigail Noel Fisher, Petitioner
v.
University of Texas at Austin, et al.
Docketed: September 19, 2011
Lower Ct: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
  Case Nos.: (09-50822)
  Decision Date: January 18, 2011
  Rehearing Denied: June 17, 2011

Fisher v. University of Texas

____________________

Affirmative action: Timeline of 10 major cases and orders

By NCC Staff | National Constitution Center

The current affirmative action case in front of the Supreme Court could change how students are chosen to be admitted to public universities across the country. Here’s a brief timeline of major court cases and government actions that may lead to another potential landmark decision.

1. Executive Order 8802 (1941)
On June 25, 1941, President Franklin D. Roosevelt outlawed discrimination based on race, color, creed, and national origin in the federal government and defense industries as the nation prepares for World War II.

2. Executive Order 10925 (1961)
The action taken by President John F. Kennedy required that government contractors “take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed, and employees are treated during employment, without regard to their race, creed, color, or national origin.”

3. Executive Order 11246 (1965)
President Lyndon B. Johnson prohibited employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, and national origin by organizations receiving federal contracts and subcontracts. Provisions that ban employment discrimination based on gender were added shortly after.

4. The Philadelphia Order (1969)
The revised Philadelphia Plan was an initiative from President Richard M. Nixon under the powers established by Johnson’s Executive Order 11246. Assistant Labor Secretary Arthur Fletcher acted to “require that bidders on any federal or federally assisted construction contracts for projects in a five-county area around Philadelphia … submit an acceptable affirmative action program which includes specific goals for the utilization of minority manpower in six skilled crafts.”

The plan was extended to other cities, and the Supreme Court decided to not hear an appeals case to overturn the plan.

5. Regents of the University of California v. Bakke (1978)
One of the true landmark cases in Supreme Court history, the Bakke decision found a way to uphold some parts of affirmative action while rejecting other parts. Allan Bakke, a white man, had twice applied for admission to the University of California Medical School at Davis. He was rejected both times, despite having the required academic achievements, while minority applicants were given preference.

The court decided the University of California had to admit Bakke, arguing the rigid use of racial quotas at the school violated the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment. But the court also found that race as part of admissions decisions was constitutional, as long as it was one of several admission criteria.

6. Proposition 209 enacted in California (1997)
Voters agreed to amend the California Constitution to bar public institutions from discriminating on the basis of race, sex, or ethnicity. Proposition 209 has survived various legal challenges, and Michigan enacted a similar law in 2006.

7. Grutter v. Bollinger (2003)
In a 5-4 opinion delivered by Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, the court said that the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment didn’t prohibit the University of Michigan’s Law School from using race in admissions decisions. The court said that the law school’s detailed review of each applicant ensured that all factors were considered along with race and that the program didn’t harm non-minority applicants.

8. Parents v. Seattle and Meredith v. Jefferson (2007)
The court decided by a 5-4 margin that public school systems can’t seek to maintain integration through measures that take into account a student’s race, on constitutional grounds. The opinion from Chief Justice John Roberts invalidated moves in Seattle and Louisville that ensured racial diversity. “The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race,” Roberts said. Justice Anthony Kennedy didn’t join with Roberts and three other justices in parts of the opinion. “Diversity, depending on its meaning and definition, is a compelling educational goal a school district may pursue,” Kennedy said.

9. Ricci v. DeStefano (2009)
White and Hispanic candidates for promotion in the New Haven, Connecticut, fire department sued after their examinations were discarded because not enough candidates from other racial groups passed their tests. The court ruled 5-4 in favor of the firefighters, and Justice Kennedy wrote the majority opinion. The court decided that plaintiffs had their rights violated under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the 14th Amendment.

10. Fisher v. University of Texas (2013)
The current case to be decided by the court in June involves a student who applied to the University of Texas at Austin in 2008, and was denied admission to the school. Abigail Fisher, who is white, said she was denied admission based on race. The state of Texas uses a Top 10 Percent plan, which guarantees admission to school for students who are in the top 10 percent of their graduating class. Fisher wasn’t in the top 10 percent of her class. The school used different criteria, including race, to fill the remaining openings at the University of Texas.

Austin Texas skyline

University of Texas -Austin

University of Texas -Austin

Austin Texas skyline

___________

Video: Texas Longhorns Football

________________

________________

About Dilemma X

Dilemma X, LLC provides research dedicated to the progression of economic development. Our services aid clients in enhancing overall production statistics. Please visit http://www.dilemma-x.com for more information

View all posts by Dilemma X

Subscribe

Subscribe to our RSS feed and social profiles to receive updates.

No comments yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: