- Published: November 12, 2022
- Updated: November 12, 2022
- University / College: University of Aberdeen
- Language: English
- Downloads: 11
IntroductionThis research paper discusses about the arguments between Abigail Fisher and University of Texas. This argument was presented in October, 2012. The location of this argument was University of Texas and the solution was not provided for this case up to till hence it was the one of pending case between Fisher and Texas University. The petitioner of this case was Abigail N. Fisher and the respondent of this case was University of Texas at Austin, et al. This pending case was granted on February, 2012 and argued on October, 2012. The thesis statement or main argument of this case was that does the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment permit the consideration of race in undergraduate admission decision. This case discussed the argument between Abigail and University of Texas. The solution of this case based upon the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection. University of Texas denied the application of Fisher due to racism and some reasons. Hence Fisher appealed an argument or case against Texas University. This case was not decided for providing the solution for Fisher or Texas University (David W. Lee, 2012). The advocates for this case in order to solving this problem were Bert W. Rein, Gregory G. Garre and Donald B. Verrilli. In this, Bert W. Rein was the advocate and he argued for the petitioner or Abigail N. Fisher. The respondent of University of Texas was supported by the advocate Gregory G. Garre. Donald B. Verrilli was the Solicitor General, Department of Justice in United States. Fisher vs. University of Texas was a case recently before the United States Supreme Court concerned the affirmative action admissions policy of the University of Texas at Austin. This case, brought by the undergraduate Abigail fisher in 2008, and Fisher asked that the Supreme Court declared the admissions policy of the Texas University with Grutter V. Bollinger. An overruling of Grutter could be ended affirmative action policies in admissions at United States universities. The court of United States heard Fisher V. University of Texas in 2009 and upheld the legality of admission policy of United States. The case between Fisher and University of Texas was appealed from the fifth circuit that also ruled in favor of University of Texas.
Background of this caseAbigail Noel fisher and Racher Multer applied to the University of Texas at Austin in 2008 for the under graduation and but their application was denied by the University of Texas. The two women filed suit that the University had denied the application against them on the basis of their race in the violation of Equal protection clause of fourteenth Amendment. They also said that due to this illegal action, the equal rights protection was violated by University of Texas. The fourteenth Amendment equal protection clause law was affected by this illegal action in University of Texas. The University of Texas at Austin was accepted students in the top 10% of each high school of Texas graduating class, under its top ten percent plan and the 81% people were admitted in University of Texas under this plan (Richard Sander, 2012). Abigail Fisher fell short of the top 10% threshold and she was considered with a pool of students in that talents, family circumstances and leadership qualities as well as race were also considered as part of admissions process. Abigail Fisher had a grade average point of 4. 0 and she was in the top of 12 % of her class at Stephen F. Austin High School. Abigail Fisher scored 1180 on her Sat examination and she was involved in the orchestra and math competitions and volunteered at Habitat for Humanity. During the case, Fisher enrolled at Louisiana State University and she was in her final year as an undergraduate in 2012 in University of Louisiana. In 2009, Sam Sparks was the judge of United States District court upheld the policy of American University policy and this policy met the standards laid out in Grutter vs. Bollinger. In this case, that decision was affirmed by a Fifth Circuit panel composed of judges Patrick and Carolyn as well as Emilio M. Garza. This case was denied by a 9-7 vote by circuit judges. In September 2011, the lawyers represented that Fisher filed petition seeking review from the Supreme Court. The court again granted certiorian on February 2012, in Fisher v. University of Texas and during the case, Elena Kagan was a judge recused herself from the case and she will not be participated in the decisions of court. The recusal of Kagan was probably due to her involvement with the case when she was solicitor general. On October 2012, the Supreme Court heard the oral arguments in the case. During that time, Bert Rain represented the petitioner, Solicitor General Donald Verrilli argued for supporting to respondent or University of Texas and Gregory Garre represented the respondent university. During the beginning of the petitioner’s argument, the questions were asked by judges Ginsburg and Sotomayor about whether the case was moot or not according to them. Especially, they were concerned with the arguments of university that fisher would not had earned admission regardless of affirmative action that Fisher had already graduated from college and also she named $100 application fee as real damages. After the evaluation of this argument, the legal analysts predicted that oral argument demonstrated a majority of justices disliked the position of Texas University.
Topic of paper with critical thoughtsThis section was to make the critical thoughts of this case and the facts of this case given below. Abigail Fisher and Rachel were the residents of Texas and the applications were denied by the university of Texas that’ why Fisher appealed this case to Supreme Court. They had also filed this suit against alleging that University of Texas’s admission policies discriminated against them and the policies and procedures of Texas University were based upon the basis of race. Hence this action was the violation of their Equal protections under fourteenth and federal civil rights status. University of Texas also sought damages, injunctive and declaratory relief and also proceeding with the separate phases of liability, remedy, district court found no liability as well as granted summary judgment to the University of Texas. The procedural post of this case defied the scope of review. There were no class and both applied students deny intention for reapplying to University of Texas. It followed that the two students lack standing for seeking the forward looking declaratory relief. In 1997, the Texas legislature enacted a law requiring the University of Texas for admitting all high school seniors and the senior ranked in to top ten percent of their high school classes. The undergraduate population and the university population were based upon after the determination of differences between the racial and ethnic makeup. Then university of Texas decided to modify the race admissions policy. This policy was having the rules that limited students can only apply for higher studies in this Texas University. Hence this policy was based upon the race and ethnic makeup of students. The limited students can only join in Texas University. This new policy continued for admitting all in-state students and the students graduated in the top ten percent of their school classes. The race was the factor that was considered for the remaining students in order to admit in University of Texas. Hence the fresh man was very difficult to join in University of Texas. Abigail N. Fisher was a Caucasian female and she was applied for undergraduate admission to the University of Texas in 2008. She was not in the top ten percent of her class that’s why she completed for the admission with other non-stop ten percent in-state applicants. But Texas University denied the application of Fisher due to the race and ethnic makeup. Then she was raised a case against University of Texas. In this case, she noted that the decision of Texas University influenced the Equal Protection of Fourteenth Amendment and this was the violation of U. S. C section 1983. But the University argued that the utilization of race a narrowly tailored by means of pursuing the greater diversity and this University tried to classify the students that based upon the race and ethnic makeup (Cal Jillson, 2013). According to this case, the District court decided the solution and the solution was given in favor Texas. The solution of District court was that the action of University of Texas was legal and they were planning to evolve the greater diversity by means of considering the race and ethnic makeup in Texas. Then Fisher appealed this case to Supreme Court of America against University of Texas. American Supreme Court was not decided the solution for this case and hence this case was one of pending case in Supreme Court. The main thought of this case was that whether this case will be supported to Abigail Fisher or to University of Texas. According to Texas University, they denied the application of Fisher in order to evolve the greatest diversity to University. Hence they had given the admission that based upon the race and ethnic makeup. But in this case, all students can’t get the Equal Rights and they will be affected by this racial ethnicity. Abigail Fisher raised a case against University of Texas due to illegal actions. She had also raised a case in order to get Equal Rights protections to her (Fastcase, 2012). According to her, the action of University of Texas was illegal and they had done the poor activities against her. After the argument, the District court decided the solution in favor of University of Texas. Then, Fisher had also appealed her case to Supreme Court and but the Supreme Court was not decided the solution up to till. Both were waiting for the solution. But according to legal analysts were supported to Fisher and they were not supported to University of Texas in order to protect the Equal rights. United States Supreme Court of appeals for the fifth affirmed the district court of decision. Supreme Court was supported to her argument and this Supreme Court had given the opportunity to the success of Fisher against University of Texas. Abigail Fisher appealed the appellate court’s decision. Many points out the fact that the first generation Asian American students had benefited from the Affirmative Action and this Affirmative Action will be helped to Fisher in order to provide the legal reaction to her. At the same time, Affirmative Action concentrated that colleges and universities will have to be creative for making the professional life to students.
Conclusion of this caseThis section expressed the conclusion of this topic that does the Equal protections Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment permit the consideration of race in undergraduate admissions decisions or not. The Equal protection of fourteenth Amendment provided the Equal Rights to the law and they were not considered the race and ethnic makeup. The requirement of Equal protection had been read to apply for the Federal Government as a component of Fifth Amendment due to the process. This Equal Protection law marked a great shift in Constitutionalism of United States. The Equal Protection of Clause of 14th amendment of U. S Constitution prohibited states from denying any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the law and this law stated that individual must be treated same manner as others in same conditions and circumstances. For Example, if state prohibited one person from entering into employment contract and because of the person was a member of particular race, and then the Equal protection law was intended to provide the equal application of the laws. According to this law, Fisher can get the legal solution against University of Texas. The legal analysts predicted that the solution will be supported to Fisher and no one liked the oral arguments of University of Texas. University of Texas was not having the legal reason for cancelling or neglecting the applications. They argued that its use of race was a narrowly tailored by means of achieving greater diversity in University that’s why they had neglected the applications of Fisher. In this situation, Fisher had the negative reaction from the University of Texas. But she believed the overall argument will be supports to her in order to get the Equal Rights from the University. After reviewing the arguments of Fisher and University of Texas, Fisher’s argument was legal. Then it was also considered that the solution will also be decided in favor of Fisher in order to give her Equal Rights. According to the Equal Protection law, the Supreme will not be considered the race in undergraduate admissions policies. The Amendment law possessed the Equal Rights to everyone in America and hence the solution will be given by Supreme Court in favor of Fisher. This will be the legal decision and because the education was not based upon the race and ethnicity in the world instead of education was based upon the knowledge and attitude of students in UniversityIn the case of legal analysts, they were supported to the oral arguments of Fisher. The solution must be given to Fisher and Fourteenth Amendment must not permit the consideration of race in undergraduate admissions decisions. The University of Texas must be given the admission to Fisher in order to continue her higher studies. University of Texas decided the illegal rule against Fisher. According to the Equal protection rule, the solution will be in favor of Fisher. This will be legal judgment of Supreme Court in future.
The paper "Court case research paper law general essay" was written by a real student and voluntarily submitted to this database. You can use this work as a sample in order to gain inspiration or start the research for your own writing. You aren't allowed to use any part of this example without properly citing it first.
If you are the author of this paper and don't want it to be used on EduPony, contact us for its removal.Ask for Removal
Cite this Research Paper
EduPony. (2022) 'Court case research paper law general essay'. 12 November.
EduPony. (2022, November 12). Court case research paper law general essay. Retrieved from https://edupony.com/court-case-research-paper-law-general-essay/
EduPony. 2022. "Court case research paper law general essay." November 12, 2022. https://edupony.com/court-case-research-paper-law-general-essay/.
1. EduPony. "Court case research paper law general essay." November 12, 2022. https://edupony.com/court-case-research-paper-law-general-essay/.
EduPony. "Court case research paper law general essay." November 12, 2022. https://edupony.com/court-case-research-paper-law-general-essay/.
"Court case research paper law general essay." EduPony, 12 Nov. 2022, edupony.com/court-case-research-paper-law-general-essay/.
If you have any suggestions on how to improve Court case research paper law general essay, please do not hesitate to contact us. We want to know more: [email protected]