harlan logo
Fisher v. University of Texas

After hearing both sides of the case, the Supreme Court took a vote, with the majority of the votes favoriting towards The University of Texas at Austin. Taking Abigail Fisher’s into play, the votes were still for the respondent. Fisher believes the University had not admitted her because of her race, which means that violates her 14th amendment. The 14 amendment states: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” As a court, we used past cases to help with our decision. We really aimed at two cases, Grutter v. Bollinger and Ricci v. DeStefano. Both cases were similar to this case. All and all, as s Supreme Court, we would like to address that we are in favor of The University of Texas at Austin.

Abigail Fisher, a white high school student from Sugar Land, Texas, was hoping to attend The University of Texas at Austin for college. After applying, she learned she had been rejected admission into the University. To her full belief, she was rejected because of her race. As a Supreme Court we allowed to see the case. We took into consideration if her 14th amendment was being violated, at the end of the 14th amendment it states: “nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” If Fisher’s 14th amendment is being violated that is unconstitutional, we review past court cases to help with our decision. The University describes their use of race in the admissions process as “highly individualized and modest,” and points out that they have set no target for minority admissions. We looked at Ricci v. DeStefano case. Firefighters believed they were denied promotion due to their race. 19 whites and 1 hispanic were involved in the case, the fire station decided no promotions would be given out so no one feels their amendments were being violated. We also looked at Grutter v. Bollinger because the University asked for race on the application to ensure diversity in the University. Lastly, we took the time to learn the Regents of the University of California v. Bakke case. The University saved a small fraction of applicants spots so there was diversity. The case stated: “the school may use the applicant’s race as a consideration on other ways because the school has a compelling interest in encouraging diversity in its student body.” These cases are all in favor of the respondent. As a court, we have made the decision that The University of Texas at Austin has not violated Abigail Fisher’s 14th amendment. Therefore, we are ruling in the University’s favor in a 5-4 vote.