Essay On Discrimination In College Admissions

Discrimination has been a problem for many decades in the United States, with slavery being the ultimate form of discrimination. There is still discrimination in the present involving immigrants and minority races. Some people believe that using race as a criteria for college admissions, commonly referred to as affirmative action, is discrimination. One student went as far as bringing the issue to court because she believed that using race as a factor for admissions is unconstitutional. This woman, Abigail Fisher, applied to the University of Texas at Austin and was denied admission. She claims her denial was due to the fact that the university uses affirmative action in their admissions. There is a precedent case from 2003 that deals with race-conscious admissions. The Court ruled that it was constitutional to use race as a factor for admission. The holistic review admissions process that includes race as one of the special circumstances at the University of Texas at Austin is constitutional because it helps the university achieve its goal of having a diverse student body and with its diversity involving many factors such as race, income, and personal upbringing. The precedent case for this is Grutter v. Bollinger. In this case the Supreme Court ruled that admitting a critical mass of minority students in order to create a more diverse and educational environment is constitutional (“Grutter v. Bollinger”). It is also constitutional because of the highly individualized, holistic review of each applicant and the act of giving thought to all of the ways they can contribute to a more diverse classroom (“Grutter v. Bollinger”). The Court also ruled the race conscious admission must be limited with time (“Grutter v. Bollinger”). The main point of the case is that educational diversity is a state interest (“Grutter v. Bollinger”). In order for the respondent to win the case, there must be evidence to show that a diverse student body is their main interest, they use multiple different factors, and they do not use race-balancing quotas to meet the goal of diversity. The University of Texas uses an individualized review of each applicant. Race is one of the factors of admission. Their application uses a Personal Achievement Score. There are six factors and one is special circumstances. In this factor there are seven attributes, one of which is race. This application style makes race truly a factor of factors (“Respondent 's Brief”). They give no points or an automatic advantage based on the race of an applicant, rather they look at the achievements of the applicant and what they can individually bring to the school (“Respondent 's Brief”). The main mission of the University of Texas is to educate the future leaders of Texas, an incredibly diverse state (“Respondent 's Brief”). Another mission is to have a student body that is diverse in a variety of educational ways (“Respondent 's Brief”). The university considers that diversity includes many factors, not just race (“Respondent 's Brief”). The University of Texas follows the precedent because their main goal is to have a diverse learning environment. One of the arguments that the petitioner makes is that the Top 10% law helped increase the diversity of the university with successful students (“Petitioner 's Brief”). According to the University of Texas, the Top 10% law was not successful at achieving real diversity (“Respondent 's Brief”). Also for the university, the Top 10% law ensures an opportunity for all races, but the single criteria undermines academic selectivity and other factors for a diverse environment (“Respondent 's Brief”). The petitioner also stated that the special circumstances factor in …show more content…
Because of the violation of equal protection strict scrutiny should be used. If this is used, the university could prove that the use of race is a compelling state interest. The university would also have to provide information that using race is the only possible way that their goal of diversity can be reached. Because Fisher said her rights under the Fourteenth amendment were violated, the University of Texas should have evidence to prove why diversity is a compelling interest. They would also have to have data about their race-neutral efforts failing at achieving diversity. If the university can prove that diversity is a significant interest to the government, their admission would be