There is no evidence that whites are displaced in the process, and those few who are affected likely have many alternatives, as Abigail Fisher did when she was admitted into Louisiana State University after she failed to get into the University of Texas at Austin.
Her grades and class standing did not get her admitted even with two bites at the apple -- she did not qualify for the percent plan (under which top students from Texas high schools are admitted), and she was not admitted under the UT holistic review process.
To the extent that race is accounted for in the process, it should be one of many considerations: I have argued that Justice Powell's opinion was the correct route for the Supreme Court to follow when it took up had settled that issue for the foreseeable future. But having conservatives, and especially federal judges, cursing the darkness does not help matters; one can only ask why conservative organizations continue to litigate settled matters and to protest, methinks, too much.
The use of affirmative action in college admissions has been the constitutional law of the land as determined by the U. Under traditional rules of civil procedure, before one can go to court, there must be a demonstrable harm to be remedied, and the admissions evidence clearly shows that whites are not harmed by affirmative action in the aggregate.
Chief Justice John Roberts’s census ruling may strengthen deference to executive discretion when wielded by a future normal presidency, but for select occasions, he has revived a neglected counterdeference tool—pretext analysis. The petition is available in partially redacted form below.readers.
The unnamed foreign corporation challenging a subpoena issued by Special Counsel Robert Mueller filed a cert petition seeking Supreme Court review of the D. Rebecca Ingber, associate professor at Boston University School of Law and contributing editor for Lawfare, testified about Judge Kavanaugh's approaches to executive deference on national security matters and to international law., better known as the “Steel Seizure Case.” It’s an all-time classic regarding the separation of powers in general and war-related powers in particular (not to mention constitutional interpretive method, theories of emergency power, and more).
Since its inception, this plan had no racial component; while it mitigated some of the earlier losses, its participants were of all races, predominantly whites, who recently constituted more than half the percent plan admittees, even though whites are less than a third of Texas K-12 enrollments.
Even so, in another generation of white applicants sued the university, arguing in a 2008 federal district court case and a 2011 circuit appeal that, with the percentage plan in use, the university should not be permitted to use the tools that had constitutionalized.
For now, with the Supreme Court has vacated and remanded the appeals court ruling: "The reviewing court must ultimately be satisfied that no workable race-neutral alternatives would produce the educational benefits of diversity." The Supreme Court ordered the appeals court to reconsider the key holding of - that any plan be narrowly tailored.
As I had feared, they appear to have misapprehended the percent plan, which is race-neutral and resulted in over half its admits being Anglos, else the case would not still be in play, as UT’s plan is operationally like the Michigan Law School plan, which the Supreme Court backed 10 year ago. Irma Rangel in the drafting of the percent plan, a tremendous success, and it was race-neutral.