Abigail Fisher is batting 0-for-2 against the Supreme Court.
For the second time, Ms. Fisher’s attempt to undo the University of Texas’ affirmative action program does not jibe with the Supreme Court, who Thursday upheld the university’s affirmative action program as constitutional, greenlighting the university’s limited use of race as a factor in admissions.
Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote in the majority opinion:
“The Court’s affirmance of the University’s admissions policy does not necessarily mean the University may rely on that same policy without refinement. It is the University’s ongoing obligation to engage in constant deliberation and continued reflection regarding its admissions policies.”
Ms. Fisher applied for admission to the University of Texas in 2008 and was denied admission. She claims the school’s affirmative action program led to her denial of admission, further alleging that students of color with similar credentials were admitted to the school.
The Court’s decision was split along partisan lines. Justices Kennedy, Ginsburg, Breyer, and Sotomayor ruled in favor of the university’s affirmative action program, while Justices Alito, Thomas, and Roberts dissented. Justice Elena Kagan recused herself from the case because she worked on it while she was still was the U.S. solicitor general.
The late Justice Scalia heard oral arguments for the case prior to his death in February, during which time he questioned whether admitting more black students actually benefits the students or the university.
A previous attempt by Ms. Fisher to challenge the affirmative action program at the University of Texas came to the Supreme Court in 2013. The Court ruled that the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals failed to apply strict scrutiny in its decision affirming the University of Texas’ affirmative action program. They vacated the decision and remanded the case back down for further consideration.
In the Court’s dissent, Justice Alito wrote:
“Something strange has happened since our prior decision in this case. This is nothing less than a plea for deference that we emphatically rejected in our prior decision. Today, however, the Court inexplicably grants that request.”
Abigail Fisher has waged a seven-year battle against the University of Texas, the whole time unable to produce any kind of evidence that she had been passed over for a less qualified minority applicant, because, as the university has attested throughout this ordeal, Fisher wasn’t going to get in anyway. Ms. Fisher’s GPA and SAT scores weren’t high enough to guarantee admission. She didn’t have enough external accomplishments to convince the school otherwise. She wasn’t a poor student, but there were students more qualified to be admitted than she.
ProPublica wrote of Ms. Fisher’s studentship and her statement that she was denied admission on the basis of her race, pointing out pertinent information both Fisher and her attorneys conveniently did not acknowledge while challenging the university’s affirmative action program.
“It’s true that the university, for whatever reason, offered provisional admission to some students with lower test scores and grades than Fisher. Five of those students were black or Latino. Forty-two were white.
Neither Fisher nor [her attorney] mentioned those 42 applicants in interviews. Nor did they acknowledge the 168 black and Latino students with grades as good as or better than Fisher’s who were also denied entry into the university that year.”
Abigail Fisher’s campaign to stop affirmative action is done, not like it should have ever happened anyway. She was a slightly above average student who applied in a highly competitive year. She was denied admission along with scores of other students arguably more qualified. She was then recruited by the guy who gutted the Voting Rights Act for years of legal challenges that ultimately proved fruitless. Her battle with the University of Texas’ affirmative action program, which has been bankrolled by conservative backers, has been a waste of time, a waste of money, and a waste of resources, egged along by one man’s mission to undo any and all legislation that evens the racial playing field in a country whose history is rich with racism.
But it’s over, barring some kind of Hail Mary in the future. One of the benefits of Supreme Court decisions is that they set legal precedent. This means Thursday’s decision in Fisher II will make it that much harder for Abigail Fisher to keep up her racially-motivated tantrum.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FY8U-AjIIX8
Featured image via YouTube
h/t NPR
