SCOTUS to hear major affirmative action case

See also: Major cases of the Supreme Court October 2015 term

Fisher v. University of Texas
Docket number: 14-981
Court: United States Supreme Court
Court membership
Chief Justice John G. Roberts Associate Justices Antonin Scalia Anthony Kennedy • Clarence Thomas Ruth Bader Ginsburg • Steven G. Breyer Samuel Alito • Sonia Sotomayor • Elena Kagan

December 8, 2015

By Kelly Coyle

On Wednesday, the Supreme Court of the United States will revisit Fisher v. University of Texas, a case concerning racial preference in college admissions. The case has the potential to limit or eliminate affirmative action in higher education.

In 2008, Abigail Fisher, a white woman, was denied admission to the University of Texas at Austin. She then sued the university, arguing that because UT-Austin considers race when choosing applicants, her Fourteenth Amendment right to equal protection was violated.

According to Lisa Soronen of the National Conference of State Legislatures, "Per Texas’s Top Ten Percent Plan, the top 10 percent of Texas high school graduates are automatically admitted to UT Austin, which fills about 80 percent of the class. Unless an applicant has an 'exceptionally high academic Index,' he or she will be evaluated through a holistic review where race is one of a number of factors."

In 2013, the court heard Fisher's case, and Justice Anthony Kennedy explained in his opinion that a university must demonstrate that its consideration of race in admissions is narrowly tailored and necessary to obtain diversity. Kennedy wrote, "Strict scrutiny must not be strict in theory but feeble in fact. In order for judicial review to be meaningful, a university must make a showing that its plan is narrowly tailored to achieve the only interest that this Court has approved in this context: the benefits of a student body diversity that 'encompasses a . . . broa[d] array of qualifications and characteristics of which racial or ethnic origin is but a single though important element.' Bakke, 438 U. S., at 315 (opinion of Powell, J.)."

The case was sent back to the United States Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit for further review, and UT-Austin's admissions policy was upheld. In July 2014, Fisher petitioned the Supreme Court to review her case once again.

Fisher argues that the appeals court did not apply "strict scrutiny" when evaluating UT-Austin's admissions policy. The brief for Fisher states, "UT ultimately chose to dilute the demographic interest presented in its Proposal to a vague and undefined concept: that it seeks only to reduce, not eliminate, 'the degree of disparity' between its minority enrollment and state demographics. App. 197a. Such an undefined goal cannot be subjected to strict scrutiny. There is simply no way for a court to know what specific 'demographic' interest UT was pursuing, why a race-neutral alternative could not achieve that interest, and when that 'demographic' goal would be satisfied. UT’s equivocation undermines any claim that an asserted interest in demographic parity is 'both constitutionally permissible and substantial.'"

SCOTUSBlog's Lyle Denniston offered two potential reasons for the court's decision to take on Fisher's case again. He wrote, "One potential avenue for new guidance would be for the Court to refine the concept of 'critical mass' — that is, the point at which a college admissions plan produces enough minority students with special promise of succeeding in college to achieve the academic goal of racial diversity, broadly defined and not just a racial quota. ...The most intriguing prospect would be for the Court to make the decision turn on an issue that Fisher’s lawyers say entered the case late: whether a university can adopt an admissions plan that views applicants differently based on whether they went to racially segregated high schools with lower academic performance ratings."

Question presented: "Whether the Fifth Circuit's re-endorsement of the University of Texas at Austin's use of racial preferences in undergraduate admissions decisions can be sustained under this Court's decisions interpreting the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, including Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin, 133 S. Ct. 2411 (2013)."

See also

• Supreme Court of the United States
• History of the Supreme Court
• Major cases of the Supreme Court October 2015 term
• Supreme Court cases, October term 2015
• Fisher v. University of Texas

External links

• SupremeCourt.gov
• American Bar Association, 2015-2016 Supreme Court Briefs