Supreme Court Sends Affirmative Action Case Back to Appeals Court
Today the Supreme Court issued an opinion in the case on the affirmative action program at the University of Texas at Austin campus, deciding to send the case back to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals for further scrutiny in a seven to one decision.
The case,Fisher v. University of Texas, which comes from a Caucasian student claiming to have been denied admissions at the University of Texas at Austin on account of her race, could "eliminate diversity as a rationale sufficient to justify any use of race in admission decisions." The US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit previously ruled in favor of the University of Texas, indicating that the university had not violated the civil or constitutional rights of the plaintiffs.
The opinion [PDF], written by Justice Anthony Kennedy, argues that the Fifth Circuit did not review the program with sufficient scrutiny as required by the Supreme Court case Grutter v. Bollinger. The Grutter case ruled that affirmative action programs in university admissions were constitutional provided the program takes into account multiple qualifications "of which racial or ethnic origin is but a single though important element." Kennedy also wrote that the UT Austin program could only be considered constitutional if the university could prove "no workable race-neutral alternatives would produce the educational benefits of diversity."
Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg dissented from the majority opinion, believing that the Court should have upheld the decision in favor of UT Austin. In her dissent, she wrote [PDF] "I have several times explained why government actors,including state universities, need not be blind to the lingering effects of 'an overtly discriminatory past,' the legacy of 'centuries of law-sanctioned inequality.'" Justice Elena Kagan recused herself from the case.
Media Resources: Fisher v. University of Texas 6/24/2013; Reuters 6/24/2013; USA Today 6/24/2013; Feminist Newswire 10/10/2012
10/13/2015 EEOC Launches Hollywood Gender Discrimination Probe - The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has contacted several women directors in Hollywood in an effort to determine whether legal intervention is necessary to disrupt the industry's discriminatory hiring practices.
In a letter sent to some 50 women filmmakers, the EEOC - which is responsible for protecting individuals from employment discrimination based on sex, race, color, religion and national origin through enforcement of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 - requested interviews with them to "learn more about the gender-related issues" women behind the camera face in both the film and television industries.
In May, following the release of a study by the San Diego State University Center for the Study of Women in Television in Film revealing only 7 percent of 2014's 250 top-grossing movies were helmed by women, the ACLU of Southern California and the national ACLU Women's Rights Project urged state and federal rights agencies to investigate Hollywood's failure to hire equal numbers of women. . . .
10/12/2015 Report Finds Texas' HB2 Increases Abortion Wait Times - A new report released by the University of Texas at Austin, Texas Policy Evaluation Project found patients seeking abortions in Texas have experienced an increase in wait times since the passage of HB2, the 2013 Texas omnibus anti-abortion bill that attempts to cut off abortion access by requiring abortion providers in the state to fulfill medically unnecessary ambulatory surgical center requirements and secure hospital admitting privileges.
More than half of 42 clinics providing abortion in Texas have been forced to shut their doors since HB2 passed two years ago, leading Texas women to wait up to 20 days for a first consult at one of the surviving 18 reproductive health clinics operating in the state, the second most populous in the nation. . . .
10/9/2015 Federal Judge Orders Anti-Abortion Group to Cede Footage to NAF - On Tuesday, a federal judge ruled that anti-abortion group Center for Medical Progress (CMP) and its leader David Daleidan must turn over all previously unreleased "sting" videos and outtakes of National Abortion Federation (NAF) meetings the group obtained surreptitiously as part of a smear campaign against the abortion provider.
U.S. . . .