Quote:
The Supreme Court agreed Tuesday to tackle another election-year blockbuster and will decide whether the University of Texas' race-conscious admission policies violate the rights of white applicants.
The Supreme Court agreed Tuesday to tackle another election-year blockbuster and will decide whether the University of Texas' race-conscious admission policies violate the rights of white applicants.
A couple of issues spring to mind:
1. Plaintiff's legal standing to sue
Quote:
The Texas case is complicated over the issue of "standing" and whether Fisher should even be allowed to bring her lawsuit. She graduates this spring from Louisiana State University -- where she went after being rejected by UT -- and Texas officials had argued she would then have no live controversy or claim necessary for the high court to intervene. They said her only "harm" would be trying to recoup non-refundable application fees.
The high court in accepting the case made no mention of whether the standing issue would affect their ultimate ruling.
The Texas case is complicated over the issue of "standing" and whether Fisher should even be allowed to bring her lawsuit. She graduates this spring from Louisiana State University -- where she went after being rejected by UT -- and Texas officials had argued she would then have no live controversy or claim necessary for the high court to intervene. They said her only "harm" would be trying to recoup non-refundable application fees.
The high court in accepting the case made no mention of whether the standing issue would affect their ultimate ruling.
AFAIK, the last time the court was faced with a similar challenge from a senior set to graduate, it was ruled that the plaintiff did not have standing because there is no expectation that the wrong will be repeated. (See DeFunis v. Odegaard)
2. Affirmative action and equal protection:
Quote:
Abigail Noel Fisher, a former high school graduate from Sugar Land, Texas, individually sued the flagship state university when her college application was rejected in 2008. The school defends its policy of considering race as one of many factors -- such as test scores, community service, leadership and work experience -- designed to create a diverse campus.
The high court has had an evolving record on the discretion of state officials to decide who attends their institutions.
The justices in 2003 said state universities can narrowly tailor their admissions policies to consider an applicant's race.
Abigail Noel Fisher, a former high school graduate from Sugar Land, Texas, individually sued the flagship state university when her college application was rejected in 2008. The school defends its policy of considering race as one of many factors -- such as test scores, community service, leadership and work experience -- designed to create a diverse campus.
The high court has had an evolving record on the discretion of state officials to decide who attends their institutions.
The justices in 2003 said state universities can narrowly tailor their admissions policies to consider an applicant's race.
Looks like we can tack this on to the pile of topics that will be debated during the general election. It will be interesting to see what has changed since 2003, when, IIRC, the court did offer a warning that at some point in the future the interest in promoting diversity that existed during that case would no longer exist. Plus, this is a more conservative court, and one that will be without Kagan for this case.
Thoughts?
-----signature-----
I had a dream. It was an incredible dream. When I awoke, I had a huge mess to clean up.
