Host baby looking up boy to Affirmative action group
Log in through your institution. This article argues against the view that affirmative action is wrong because it involves asing group rights.
Blum's strategy has come a long way since his failed attempt to get the Supreme Court to side with Abigail Fisher, a white female University of Texas at Austin applicant who sued in after believing she was denied entry at the university because of her race.
With an evolved legal approach, the backing of the Trump administration and a newly cemented conservative majority on the Supreme Court bench, Blum may finally have the pieces he needs to push the court to ban the use of race in admissions altogether. How all of this shakes out could change the way colleges evaluate applicants.
Colleges may be forced to remove students' names and race and ethnicity checkboxes from their application, and abandon their traditional holistic admissions practices. Education and civil rights groups fear that race-neutral admissions policies will exacerbate inequality for students of color for years to come.
A race-blind admissions standard, they say, fails to take into discrimination and barriers students of color often face.
Instead, the group represented its thousands of members in the fight without using a jilted student as the face of the battle. A district court decision is expected in coming months.
He has his sights on Yale, too. And without outwardly naming a student as a lead plaintiff, the lawsuits remain timeless. SFFA can keep suing without worry that a case would be tossed for not being able to show harm to a student who may have graduated from college already.
And I think every every parent who has a or year-old kid applying to college who would endeavor to do something like this would be gravely afraid for their child's identity to be made public. But, it differs from the case against Harvard, which also includes a claim that the university intentionally discriminates against Asian American applicants.
SFFA is also waging legal battles on multiple fronts, with new allies. The group is targeting private and public schools in the jurisdictions of four different courts of appeals — nearly a third of the appellate courts in the country. The effect of the presidential transition: The Trump administration has championed race-blind admissions and abandoned Obama-era policies that encouraged universities to consider race. Dreiband also presented an oral argument on behalf of the group in the Harvard appeal.
Pyyntöäsi ei voi käsitellä
But with a Biden administration coming in, SFFA could find itself before the Supreme Court in the Harvard case next year without the backing of the federal government — arguably its strongest supporter. The high court consistently has ruled that narrowly using race in admissions decisions does not violate the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment and furthers a compelling interest in educational benefits that flow from a diverse student body.
But a university cannot use quotas or racial balancing, and must be able to pass strict scrutiny. Only Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Stephen Breyer have ruled in favor of narrowly using race in admissions decisions in the Fisher case.
Download et app:
Justice Elena Kagan, who is likely to Sotomayor and Breyer in a decision, didn't take part in that case and has not had to rule on the legality of race-conscious admissions practices. Supreme Court come in one size only — slim," Blum said, adding that he hopes the justices take up the case, but that "it is unwise to speculate on what a specific justice will do with an individual case or an individual issue.
An anti-affirmative action group is trying to erase race from college admissions Lower court losses for Students For Fair Admissions get legal strategist Edward Blum closer to his ultimate goal: returning to the Supreme Court. Not using a face also protects students in the group, Blum said.