The case of Fisher v. University of Texas is a 2008 case involving a Caucasian by the name of Abigail Fischer and the University of Texas from the description in Chicago-Kent college of Law. She believed that her admission to the institution was compromised because of her race since preference was given to minority students who were underqualified. The case was based on the claim of reverse discrimination. According to Fischer’s argument, necessity emerges as a vital component in the examination of the constitutionality of affirmative action plans (Nelson 530). Ideally, an important aspect that comes up in the case is the idea of managing diversity. The court struck down that affirmative action plan is used for undergraduate admission at the university, which awarded a substantial number of points to applications based on minority status.
Affirmative action was designed to create a more level playing field by remedying widespread patterns of discrimination that have been evident in the past. In this case, the courts subject the affirmative action programs to strict scrutiny and found out that the affirmative action policies amount to reverse discrimination. This is because it presents a situation in which a person who may be better qualified is denied enrollment in a program whether educational or employment in a specific position as a result of another person receiving preferential treatment (Kendall 498). An analysis of the court decision raises an important point in which managing diversity is not considered based on an increased representation of the protected class members but rather on the aspect of goals and capabilities to measure progress in managing diversity. The court seems to show a preference towards discontinuing affirmative action policies because, in this case, it seems they have done little to improve the economic or educational progress by taking attention away from the most pressing needs of those in need. Affirmative action can be used for the purpose of diversity, but this is only when there seems to be no alternative way to reach a goal (Schmidt, Shelley and Bardes 109). The action of the court is an important move towards ending affirmative action. Focusing on goals of qualification rather than protected classes in enforcement ensures progress in the future and signals a move away from the 1980s era where class preferential was key to ensuring that individuals who faced class discrimination were given equal opportunities.
Works Cited
"Fisher v. University of Texas." Oyez. Chicago-Kent College of Law at Illinois Tech, n.d. Web. Retrieved from https://www.oyez.org/cases/2012/11-345
Kendall, Diana. Sociology in Our Times. 11th ed. Boston, MA: Cengage Learning, 2016. Print.
Nelson, Eboni S. "Reading Between the Blurred Lines of Fisher v. University of Texas." Valparaiso University Law Review 48.2 (2013): 519-533. Web. Retrieved from http://scholar.valpo.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2328&context=vulr
Schmidt, Steffen W., Mack C. Shelley and Barbara A. Bardes. Cengage Advantage Books: American Government and Politics Today, Brief Edition, 2014-2015. 8th ed. Stamford, CT: Cengage Learning, 2014. Print.
