Dive Brief:
- Justices heard extended arguments in Abigail Fisher’s case against the University of Texas’ race-conscious admissions plan Wednesday and it may not bode well for affirmative action.
- The Chronicle of Higher Education reports that lawyers presented little hard data to address questions about how the race-conscious plan affected the number of minority students on campus, how its absence would impact diversity, and how administrators gauge the plan’s success.
- The New York Times reports that it is possible the court will avoid making a decision for a second time, but said a majority of justices appeared skeptical about the race-based nature of the university’s holistic admissions plan and even the top 10% plan that accompanies it.
Dive Insight:
UT-Austin fills 75% of its classes with graduates in the top 10% of their high schools who get automatic admission. The program does not consider race, on paper, but relies on segregated high schools to create diversity in the students it produces in the top 10%. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, on the liberal side of the court, called this part of the plan problematic on its own because it discouraged students of color from leaving segregated high schools for arguably better opportunities. Abigail Fisher brought the case, arguing she was unconstitutionally denied access to the University of Texas because of the holistic admissions plan that determines the final one-quarter of students admitted.
If the Supreme Court makes a sweeping ruling, ignoring the 2003 Grutter v. Bollinger decision that allowed traditionally unconstitutional classifications by race for a period of 25 years, it will have sweeping effects across all of academia.