Consideration Of Race For College Admissions Process : Fisher V. Texas

ISSUE: Whether the separate but equal principle violates the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment.

Affirmative action will also assist the university in reaching their desired diversity quota. In June, the Supreme Court ruled that universities can consider race as one of the main

The purpose of this action is to strive for equivalent open doors for everyone paying little heed to race or skin color. Race has always been a controversial factor in the college admission process. Critics who are supportive of the action say that colleges reach out toward minorities since they are the least diverse in the college environment. With the demographic they display they are urged most of the time to apply for college admission. Often these institutions offer some help to those minorities such

Affirmative Action. For many Texas high school students, these two words haunt them. Their future, or at least their future at the University of Texas, depends on these words. For Abigail Noel Fisher, a 2008 graduate from Sugar Land, Texas, affirmative action and its race bias policies allegedly ruined her chances of getting into this prestigious state university. Fisher argues that race should not be a factor in college admissions processes, Fisher argues for equality. Equality in respect to race is in our constitution; it surrounds us everyday. In theory, race should be irrelevant in this day and age. Humanity has established that one race is not superior to another, so why should race matter at all in the college admissions process? Why should the University of Texas, or any other university, have that “check your race” box on their applications? Abigail Fisher, and every other person applying to the university, deserves as much opportunity as every other student of any race. When it comes to college, intelligence and character should be key to admission- not the color of the applicant’s skin. The University of Texas’ current affirmative action policy is an unfair college admissions process that the Supreme Court should ban so that admissions are based on intellectual ability in high school, national testing scores, extracurricular activities, and community service; this should be changed so that every person,

Affirmative action in college admissions continues to be heatedly debated. In 2003, the Supreme Court had ruled in Grutter v. Bollinger that diversity was a compelling interest for colleges to use race in admissions. In the amicus brief that the American Sociological Association et al. provided to the Supreme Court, sociological evidence was presented to elucidate the value of affirmative action. Yet in 2006, Proposal 2 was passed in Michigan to ban affirmative action in public education (Levitsky). Based on the information in the amicus brief, the correlation between race and socioeconomic status of the minorities, and the negative effects of banning affirmative action, admissions officers at the University of Michigan should consider

INTRO: Prompt: What should “diversity on campus” mean and why? Hook: Does diversity help liberate narrow-mindedness? What exactly is diversity? To say that diversity is approached on school campuses is an understatement to the level of understanding in this increasingly globalized world. By its definition, “diversity” requires inclusion. Are school’s really working toward the inclusion of everyone? This means including color, national origin, socio-economic status, and sexual orientation. Looking at court cases and polls shown in the short articles, “Introduction from Place, Not Race: A New Vision of Opportunity in America” and “The Trouble with Diversity: How We Learned to Love Identity and Ignore Inequality,” their approach to strengthening

Racial preference has indisputably favored Caucasian males in society. Recently this dynamic has been debated in all aspects of life, including college admission. Racial bias has intruded on the students’ rights to being treated fairly. Admitting students on merit puts the best individuals into the professional environment. A university’s unprejudiced attitude towards race in applicants eliminates biases, empowers universities to harness the full potential of students’ intellect, and gives students an equal chance at admission.

Ms. Fisher argued that race or ethnicity should not be a factor in the application process because it is simply unfair. The university responded that using race as a factor is only part of the admission process and is only used to ensure a large diverse group of students. The University of Texas automatically admits students in the top ten percent of high schools in the state. The school also used the affirmative action policy to admit students of other races, even with less credentials, over white students. While Ms. Fisher was not in the top ten percent of her high school, she still thought that with her GPA, performing arts, and other achievements; she would be able to attend the university.

UT made the holistic review, based on the decisions in Bakke and Grutter v. Bollinger. Those decisions establish that; universities may consider race-when in need or have interest in student body diversity. The Fifth Circuit emphasized, that UT was not looking to consider ‘race’ as a search, but a search for unique talents and backgrounds who could increase the diversity of the student body. UT needed more diversity in its campus, so they might have helped a few

Imagine being a student of low economic status that has always dreamed of going to a world renowned university but the stench of racism still looms at the well-known college. The racism displayed at this university is undeniable and very visible which in result scares away many diverse students. Colleges claim to be diverse but with the lack of minorities due to the recognizable racism issues and problems this proposes an important matter. Racism at The University of Mississippi can be solved by raising awareness of racial problems and also the increase of mandatory diversity classes.

as having English as a second language and coming from an underprivileged background, that assisted minority applicants much more than non-minority candidates. In 2004, the University of Texas brought forth a proposal that sought to reestablish the direct consideration of race in the holistic admission process. UT’s reasoning for this re-introduction was to increase the presence of minority students in smaller “classes of participatory size” and to correct the demographic imbalance between the school and the state. This proposal was accepted without much resistance and race was added as component in calculating the Personal Achievement Index.

It has been argued that Fisher III neither provides any substantive additions to Equal Protection Clause (EPC) Jurisprudence, nor any guidance to lower courts how to apply Grutter and determine whether a race-based admissions program is consistent with the Fourteenth Amendment. Danielle Holley-Walker, in her article published in winter of 2014, explores the impact Fisher III has on race-conscious admissions programs, and argues that Fisher III enhances the strict scrutiny analysis, especially when compared to Grutter. Moreover, she argues “Justice Ginsburg’s dissent meaningfully highlights one of the most pernicious flaws in the current Equal Protection Clause jurisprudence, which is that strict scrutiny standard encourages universities to make their admissions process opaque instead of transparent and that there are many benefits that flow from having a transparent, race-conscious admissions program.”

One of the most problematic and controversial issues in The United States of America is affirmative action. Affirmative action is a policy of affording minorities certain privileges in order to combat the historical prejudice against them. In an effort to redress the historical injustices faced by African Americans, Hispanics, and other minorities, universities and employers across the nation have taken race into account when admitting students or hiring employees. Abigail Fisher, of Texas, applied for admission into the University of Texas at Austin (UT) and was denied; she sued the public university on the grounds of racial discrimination or reverse racism in the supreme court case Fisher v University of Texas.

The Amendment also has the Equal Protection Clause that prohibits states from denying any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. The laws of the state must treat an individual in the same manner as others in similar conditions and circumstances (www.law.cornell.edu). The question of whether the equal protection clause has been violated arises when a state grants a particular class of individuals the right to engage in an activity but denies other individuals the same right.

In order to study the need of a racially and culturally diverse college campus, the journey and battles fought must be dicussed. While there is a lack of diversity on college campuses today, they are not completely devoid of people of color. However, there was a time when college campuses were one hundred percent Caucasian. Jonathan R. Alger, Jorge Chapa and a team of researchers conducted studies on various college classrooms. They then went on to publish their findings in a book titled Does Diversity make a Difference? The purpose of their paper was to discuss the importance of diversity and reveal the effects of non-diverse campus. They begin their book by taking a look into the history of diversity in America. The start of the Civil Rights movement along with President Lyndon B. Johnson’s war on poverty took place in the mid 1960s. These events forced the country to face the reality of the people of color in America. These Americans of color did not have equal access to education, jobs, housing, or other valued resources (Alger et al. 2000). College administrators and faculty were starting to understand the necessity of a diverse campus. The realized that people of color had just as much to offer to the United States as the Caucasian majority. During that time, “many higher education faculty members and administrators were deeply concerned that abandonment of race sensitive admissions and hiring, at a time when most minority groups continue to be unrepresented in higher education, will severely limit campus diversity and would undermine the learning environment for all students.” (Alger et al. 2000). Additionally, a lot of the traditionally white colleges and universities were provoked and questioned by the concerns of their students. The universities and colleges began to notice their inability to extend the same educational