The U.S. Supreme Court heard Fisher v. UT this Wednesday, Dec. 9, revisiting the constitutionality of college affirmative action procedures. The date for when the opinion will be issued is unknown.
In 2008, the University of Texas at Austin (UT) denied admission to undergraduate Abigail Fisher, a white woman. Eighty-one percent of the 2008 incoming class was admitted due to a Texas law stating that any applicant who graduated from a Texas high school in the top 10 percentile is guaranteed acceptance to UT. Because of the demographics of the area, which includes cities like Dallas, Houston and San Antonio, 75 percent of the current freshman class is Hispanic or black.
The university wanted to pick up minority students from suburban, majority white schools outside of the immediate, urban area, and since Fisher did not graduate in the top 10 percentile, she was denied admission. Fisher filed a lawsuit against the university, claiming that UT’s affirmative action practice unconstitutionally classifies individuals by race in their admissions process, violating the 14th Amendment guarantee to equal protection.
Simply put, affirmative action is any “policy of favoring members of a disadvantaged group who suffer from discrimination within a culture.”
The lawsuit was heard in a U.S. District Court, which upheld the university’s policy. It was then appealed to the 5 th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which also issued a similar opinion. The case was again appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court in 2012, and in 2013, it was remanded back to the 5th Circuit Court. After further review in 2014, the 5th Circuit Court again sided with UT, and on June 29 of this year, the Supreme Court announced that it would hear the case again.
Glenn Dillard, assistant vice president of enrollment management, said that colleges should consider diversity during the recruitment process, even before admission and enrollment.
“Affirmative action can be a positive step in increasing diversity at many universities, but I have always thought it may be best to focus on recruiting efforts which will introduce to a campus a more diverse prospective student body rather than trying to select a diverse student body from those who apply for admission,” Dillard said. “Doing so would cause universities to rethink recruiting strategies and evaluate what they are doing at the beginning of the recruiting cycle rather than waiting until enough students have applied to then select the new student class.”
Senior Jacob Baker said that he does not agree with affirmative action practices, including ones adopted by colleges.
“It’s reverse racism,” Baker said. “College entry is often more difficult for white students, even if they have the grades to show that they worked as hard as everyone else, while a student of lesser merit of a minority can gain entry. Diversity is a great thing, but if it doesn’t happen naturally, which I believe it can, then it is meaningless.”
Heath Carpenter, English instructor and sponsor for the Roosevelt Institute, said that even though affirmative action can lead to some adverse side effects, it still provides a valuable opportunity for students who would not otherwise have the chance to attend college.
“Affirmative action is not perfect, as the critics have pointed out,” Carpenter said. “It can lead to reverse discrimination, it undercuts meritocracy and it can reinforce stereotypes. A cursory look at the education system shows without a doubt that we very much still live in a time of separate and unequal schooling, wherein many poor people and minority groups are educated in drastically inferior public schools compared with more affluent students. The argument is that, though imperfect, affirmative action is attempting to solve moral and philosophical injustices.”
