CourtArtist.com

Courtartist.com has Moved

The blog courtartist.com has moved. Please follow this link to the new and improved courtartist.

 

Fisher Fails to Finish 'Firmative Action

    On the first day of what promises to be a steamy week in Washington, at least outside the Supreme Court building, the Court announced its opinion in a long awaited affirmative action case, Fisher v. University of Texas.
    When the case was argued back in October it appeared that the University's use of race as an admissions factor might be struck down.
Instead, in an opinion by Justice Kennedy, the Court said such programs must meet the test of "strict scrutiny" as well as being "narrowly tailored".
    Surprisingly, for a case argued at the beginning of the term, there was but one dissenter in the 7-1 decision (Justice Kagan took no part), Justice Ginsburg.

    "The Court rightly declines to cast off the equal protection framework ...", writes Ginsburg. "Yet it stops short of reaching the conclusion that (it) warrants." 

    Justice Alito took a sip from his coffee cup.

Supreme Court Revisits Affirmative Action

Nine years after deciding that race, though not quotas, could be considered in college admissions a new, somewhat more conservative Supreme Court is reconsidering affirmative action. The case against the University of Texas was brought by Abigail Fisher, a Texas high school student who says she was denied admission because of her race.

The first question for Fisher's attorney, Bert W. Rein, came from Justice Ginsburg, who along with Justices Breyer and Sotomayor, is expected to uphold the Court's earlier position on affirmative action in college admissions. Justice Kagan, whose empty chair can be seen on the right, is not taking part in the case.

The more conservative members of the Court, who had been mostly silent during Rein's argument, sprang into active questioning as Gregory Garre took the lectern to defend the university's program.

Justice Alito, a foe of affirmative action plans who replaced Justice O'Connor, the author of the Court's earlier opinon in Grutter v. Bollinger, asked Garre, "I thought that the whole purpose of affirmative action was to help students ...from underpriviledged backgrounds, ..." "But you say ...it doesn't admit enough African Americans and Hispanics ...from priviledged backgrounds."

Replied Garre, "Because, Your Honor, our point is that we want minorities from different backgrounds"

Justice Kennedy, as usual the swing vote on which the case hinges, said, "So what you're saying is that what counts is race above all."

The term "critical mass", refering to the proportion of minorities in the student body, was bandied back and forth with both Garre and Solicitor General Verrilli trying to avoid making it sound like a number.

Justice Scalia to General Verrilli, "So we should stop calling it mass."

Verrilli, "I agree."

Scalia, "Call it a cloud or something like that."

 

SCOTUSblog's Amy Howe has the Plain English summary here.