In The

Supreme Court of the United States

ABIGAIL NOEL FISHER,

Petitioner,

v.

UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN, ET AL.,

Respondents.

Brief of the University of Miramonte as AMICUS CURIAE in support of respondents

INTEREST OF PARTY-
As the director of admissions at the University of Miramonte (UM), we take many factors into consideration in order to create a diverse population.

ARGUMENT-

If the court were to rule in favor of Fisher, it would negatively affect the admissions process at UM and therefore the university population. At our university, we take race into consideration for admissions. As well as gender, sexual orientation, economic backgrounds, extracurriculars, and religion. These factors are all considered in order to achieve the most diverse population, which leads to numerous benefits for students at our school. The court should continue to rule as it has in the previous precedents. Using race as part of a holistic plan is fair to all applicants and promotes diversity. We do not use race as a main factor, only as one of many factors, so therefore it is not unfair treatment for the applicants. If the SC were to rule that using race is unconstitutional, it would change our admissions process for the worst. Our admissions process takes all factors of applicants into consideration so we can create a diverse campus and therefore benefit the students. It is not intended to discriminate against a certain race. Our current admissions process is the best option for creating a diverse population while giving equal opportunities to all applicants.
CT KH