It was nearly 40 years ago when a fractured U.S. Supreme Court was searching for an acceptable and lawful way to take race and ethnicity into account in college admissions. The court majority viewed as unconstitutional a system that would set aside a specific number of seats for one racial group or another. But justices also wanted to enable colleges to take steps they might deem necessary to attain a racially diverse student body.
How to do that? Justice Lewis F. Powell Jr. turned to the nation’s oldest college for answers.
Powell, writing the principal opinion in the 1978 landmark case Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, cited the “Harvard College program” as an exemplar of race-conscious admissions because it did not use explicit numerical quotas to achieve diversity.
Read the full Washington Post story here.
Showing posts with label US Supreme Court. Show all posts
Showing posts with label US Supreme Court. Show all posts
Wednesday, June 22, 2016
Tuesday, April 10, 2012
Affirmative action is dead: What should rise in its place?
Red, Black and Blue
the Grio
By Sam Fulwood III
9:37 AM on 04/05/2012
For all intents and purposes, affirmative action is dead.
Case in point: A federal appeals court this week rejected a legal challenge in California to bring back race-based policies in student admissions at the University of California. By a 3-0 vote of the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco, arguably the most liberal appeals court in the nation reaffirmed Proposition 209, a voter-endorsed ban on affirmative action.
Later this year, the Supreme Court will take up Fisher v. University of Texas, a case that challenges whether applicants' race can be used as a factor in granting admission in an effort to diversify the student body. And it's entirely possible the Court will rule against Texas, effectively sealing the coffin shut on affirmative action programs for colleges and universities.
Full Story: http://www.thegrio.com/politics/the-quiet-death-of-affirmative-action-and-what-should-rise-in-its-place.php
the Grio
By Sam Fulwood III
9:37 AM on 04/05/2012
For all intents and purposes, affirmative action is dead.
Case in point: A federal appeals court this week rejected a legal challenge in California to bring back race-based policies in student admissions at the University of California. By a 3-0 vote of the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco, arguably the most liberal appeals court in the nation reaffirmed Proposition 209, a voter-endorsed ban on affirmative action.
Later this year, the Supreme Court will take up Fisher v. University of Texas, a case that challenges whether applicants' race can be used as a factor in granting admission in an effort to diversify the student body. And it's entirely possible the Court will rule against Texas, effectively sealing the coffin shut on affirmative action programs for colleges and universities.
Full Story: http://www.thegrio.com/politics/the-quiet-death-of-affirmative-action-and-what-should-rise-in-its-place.php
Contra Costa Times Your Turn: Removing race-based considerations does little to improve complex issue
Contra Costa Times
By Patrick Mattimore
Contra Costa Times Your Turn
Posted: 04/07/2012 04:00:00 PM PDT
April 8, 2012 12:30 AM GMTUpdated: 04/07/2012 05:30:03 PM PDT
The U.S. Supreme Court will decide an affirmative action case from the University of Texas this fall. The court is considering whether to overturn or significantly modify earlier decisions that permit public universities to consider race as one factor in an applicant's favor.
While the issue of racial preferences has been a hot-button topic in the United States for many years, America is by no means alone in grappling with how best to come to terms with the affirmative action issue.
Full Story: http://www.contracostatimes.com/news/ci_20343201/contra-costa-times-your-turn-removing-race-based
By Patrick Mattimore
Contra Costa Times Your Turn
Posted: 04/07/2012 04:00:00 PM PDT
April 8, 2012 12:30 AM GMTUpdated: 04/07/2012 05:30:03 PM PDT
The U.S. Supreme Court will decide an affirmative action case from the University of Texas this fall. The court is considering whether to overturn or significantly modify earlier decisions that permit public universities to consider race as one factor in an applicant's favor.
While the issue of racial preferences has been a hot-button topic in the United States for many years, America is by no means alone in grappling with how best to come to terms with the affirmative action issue.
Full Story: http://www.contracostatimes.com/news/ci_20343201/contra-costa-times-your-turn-removing-race-based
Monday, April 2, 2012
Three Myths About Affirmative Action
The Chronicle of Higher Education
March 29, 2012, 4:42 pm
By Richard Kahlenberg
With the nation focused on the U.S. Supreme Court’s consideration of President Obama’s health-care legislation this spring, many in higher education are talking about another blockbuster case: the challenge to a racial affirmative-action program at the University of Texas, to be considered this fall. Some of the early commentary, however, is creating misconceptions about what is at stake in the Fisher v. Texas litigation. Here are three recent myths that have surfaced.
http://chronicle.com/blogs/innovations/three-myths-about-affirmative-action/32084?sid=at&utm_source=at&utm_medium=en
March 29, 2012, 4:42 pm
By Richard Kahlenberg
With the nation focused on the U.S. Supreme Court’s consideration of President Obama’s health-care legislation this spring, many in higher education are talking about another blockbuster case: the challenge to a racial affirmative-action program at the University of Texas, to be considered this fall. Some of the early commentary, however, is creating misconceptions about what is at stake in the Fisher v. Texas litigation. Here are three recent myths that have surfaced.
http://chronicle.com/blogs/innovations/three-myths-about-affirmative-action/32084?sid=at&utm_source=at&utm_medium=en
To Enroll More Minority Students, Colleges Work Around the Courts
The New York Times
April 1, 2012
By RICHARD PÉREZ-PEÑA
With its decision to take up racial preferences in admissions at public colleges, the Supreme Court has touched off a national guessing game about how far it might move against affirmative action and how profoundly colleges might change as a result.
But no matter how the court acts, recent history shows that when courts or new laws restrict affirmative action, colleges try to find other ways to increase minority admissions.
The aggressiveness of those efforts, and the results, vary widely by state, but generally they increase minority enrollment — though not as much as overt affirmative action once did. And they have tended to help Hispanic applicants far more than blacks, at least partly because of the demographics of the states where they have been tried.
Full Story: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/02/us/college-affirmative-action-policies-change-with-laws.html?_r=1
April 1, 2012
By RICHARD PÉREZ-PEÑA
With its decision to take up racial preferences in admissions at public colleges, the Supreme Court has touched off a national guessing game about how far it might move against affirmative action and how profoundly colleges might change as a result.
But no matter how the court acts, recent history shows that when courts or new laws restrict affirmative action, colleges try to find other ways to increase minority admissions.
The aggressiveness of those efforts, and the results, vary widely by state, but generally they increase minority enrollment — though not as much as overt affirmative action once did. And they have tended to help Hispanic applicants far more than blacks, at least partly because of the demographics of the states where they have been tried.
Full Story: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/02/us/college-affirmative-action-policies-change-with-laws.html?_r=1
Thursday, March 1, 2012
U. to side with UT-Austin in affirmative action case
The Daily Princetonian
by Randolph Brown
Staff Writer
Published: Wednesday, February 29th, 2012
As the Supreme Court plans to hear a major affirmative action case this spring, the University will continue to express support for the consideration of race in the admissions process, officials said.
The Court decided last Tuesday to review the case of Fisher v. Texas, in which Abigail Fisher, a white student, claimed to be denied admission to the University of Texas at Austin because of her race. Fisher filed a lawsuit for alleged racial discrimination. This is the third time the nation’s highest court has decided to hear a case on affirmative action. The court last evaluated the use of race in admissions in 2003.
Full Story: http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/2012/02/29/30144/
by Randolph Brown
Staff Writer
Published: Wednesday, February 29th, 2012
As the Supreme Court plans to hear a major affirmative action case this spring, the University will continue to express support for the consideration of race in the admissions process, officials said.
The Court decided last Tuesday to review the case of Fisher v. Texas, in which Abigail Fisher, a white student, claimed to be denied admission to the University of Texas at Austin because of her race. Fisher filed a lawsuit for alleged racial discrimination. This is the third time the nation’s highest court has decided to hear a case on affirmative action. The court last evaluated the use of race in admissions in 2003.
Full Story: http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/2012/02/29/30144/
Ruben Navarrette: A new challenge to affirmative action
The Californian.com
12:06 AM, Mar. 1, 2012
As you would expect from someone who has written about this subject for more than 25 years, my answer is nuanced.
If the goal of the program is to make amends for past injustice, then we should end it. Growing up Mexican-American in the Southwest in the 1940s and '50s, my parents routinely faced discrimination. But that should not entitle my own children, who are being raised in an upper-middle-class neighborhood, to a leg up when they apply to college. One has nothing to do with the other.
Full Story: http://www.thecalifornian.com/article/20120301/OPINION04/203010310
12:06 AM, Mar. 1, 2012
As you would expect from someone who has written about this subject for more than 25 years, my answer is nuanced.
If the goal of the program is to make amends for past injustice, then we should end it. Growing up Mexican-American in the Southwest in the 1940s and '50s, my parents routinely faced discrimination. But that should not entitle my own children, who are being raised in an upper-middle-class neighborhood, to a leg up when they apply to college. One has nothing to do with the other.
Full Story: http://www.thecalifornian.com/article/20120301/OPINION04/203010310
DeWayne Wickham: Affirmative-action defense is secondary to bigger issue
The Tennesseean
9:30 PM, Feb. 28, 2012
My first reaction to the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to hear a challenge to the University of Texas’ admissions policy was to mount a fierce defense of the school’s effort to bandage the gaping wounds in our education system.
Full Story: http://www.tennessean.com/article/20120229/COLUMNIST0150/302290113/DeWayne-Wickham-Affirmative-action-defense-secondary-bigger-issue
9:30 PM, Feb. 28, 2012
My first reaction to the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to hear a challenge to the University of Texas’ admissions policy was to mount a fierce defense of the school’s effort to bandage the gaping wounds in our education system.
Full Story: http://www.tennessean.com/article/20120229/COLUMNIST0150/302290113/DeWayne-Wickham-Affirmative-action-defense-secondary-bigger-issue
Monday, February 27, 2012
Supreme Court Takes Up Challenge to Race-Conscious Admissions at U. of Texas
The Chronicle of Higher Education
February 21, 2012
By Peter Schmidt
Washington
[Updated at 3:49 p.m. with additional reaction.]
The U.S. Supreme Court announced on Tuesday that it would take up a lawsuit challenging race-conscious admissions at the University of Texas, setting the stage for it to reconsider affirmative-action policies that it had ruled constitutional in 2003, before its composition significantly changed.
The case, Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin (No. 11-345), involves an appeal of a decision last year by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit that upheld the race-conscious admissions policies of the chief undergraduate program at the University of Texas at Austin. Among the key questions in the case is whether the university was constitutionally precluded from considering applicants' race or ethnicity because it could achieve diversity in a race-neutral manner, through a state law guaranteeing students in the top 10th of their high-school classes admission to any public college in the state.
Full Story: http://chronicle.com/article/Supreme-Court-Takes-Up/130885/?sid=at&utm_source=at&utm_medium=en
February 21, 2012
By Peter Schmidt
Washington
[Updated at 3:49 p.m. with additional reaction.]
The U.S. Supreme Court announced on Tuesday that it would take up a lawsuit challenging race-conscious admissions at the University of Texas, setting the stage for it to reconsider affirmative-action policies that it had ruled constitutional in 2003, before its composition significantly changed.
The case, Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin (No. 11-345), involves an appeal of a decision last year by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit that upheld the race-conscious admissions policies of the chief undergraduate program at the University of Texas at Austin. Among the key questions in the case is whether the university was constitutionally precluded from considering applicants' race or ethnicity because it could achieve diversity in a race-neutral manner, through a state law guaranteeing students in the top 10th of their high-school classes admission to any public college in the state.
Full Story: http://chronicle.com/article/Supreme-Court-Takes-Up/130885/?sid=at&utm_source=at&utm_medium=en
A Defense of Affirmative Action
The Huffington Post
Ediberto Roman.
Professor of Law, Florida International University
Posted: 02/27/2012 11:19 am
Among the most controversial issues of our day, perhaps with exception of another one of my favorites -- immigration reform -- is affirmative action. It appears that the Supreme Court of the United States may once and for all end such programs, and with it, society's ongoing debate concerning the propriety of such efforts. Indeed, just a week ago, the Court granted cert. in Fisher v. University of Texas Austin. In this case, the Court will examine UT's undergraduate admissions program in order to determine whether it comports with the United States Constitution's Equal Protection Clause.
Full Story: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ediberto-roman/affirmative-action-defense_b_1302628.html
Ediberto Roman.
Professor of Law, Florida International University
Posted: 02/27/2012 11:19 am
Among the most controversial issues of our day, perhaps with exception of another one of my favorites -- immigration reform -- is affirmative action. It appears that the Supreme Court of the United States may once and for all end such programs, and with it, society's ongoing debate concerning the propriety of such efforts. Indeed, just a week ago, the Court granted cert. in Fisher v. University of Texas Austin. In this case, the Court will examine UT's undergraduate admissions program in order to determine whether it comports with the United States Constitution's Equal Protection Clause.
Full Story: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ediberto-roman/affirmative-action-defense_b_1302628.html
Will the Supreme Court End Affirmative Action?
The Daily Beast
Dan Slater
Feb 26, 2012 4:45 AM EST
Feb 26, 2012 4:45 AM EST
When the Supreme Court agreed to hear a case challenging affirmative action, many saw evidence that it wants to end the practice for good. Not so fast, writes Dan Slater.
When the Supreme Court announced this week that it would hear a case involving race-conscious admissions at the University of Texas, many in the legal community suspected it was high noon for affirmative action in American higher education.
Full Story: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/02/26/will-supreme-court-end-affirmative-action-not-so-fast.html
Dan Slater
Feb 26, 2012 4:45 AM EST
Feb 26, 2012 4:45 AM EST
When the Supreme Court agreed to hear a case challenging affirmative action, many saw evidence that it wants to end the practice for good. Not so fast, writes Dan Slater.
When the Supreme Court announced this week that it would hear a case involving race-conscious admissions at the University of Texas, many in the legal community suspected it was high noon for affirmative action in American higher education.
Full Story: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/02/26/will-supreme-court-end-affirmative-action-not-so-fast.html
Wednesday, February 22, 2012
Supreme Court To Revisit Affirmative Action In University Of Texas Case
Huffington Post
Posted: 02/21/12 10:37 AM ET | Updated: 02/22/12 10:20 AM ET
Mike Sacks
WASHINGTON -- Affirmative action is heading back to the Supreme Court, and this time its prospects for survival are poorer than ever.
The Court announced on Tuesday that it has agreed to hear a challenge to the University of Texas' affirmative action program, which is used in sorting through applications after the automatic admission of all in-state applicants who graduated in the top 10 percent of their high school class.
Full Story: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/21/supreme-court-affirmative-action-texas_n_1290736.html
Posted: 02/21/12 10:37 AM ET | Updated: 02/22/12 10:20 AM ET
Mike Sacks
WASHINGTON -- Affirmative action is heading back to the Supreme Court, and this time its prospects for survival are poorer than ever.
The Court announced on Tuesday that it has agreed to hear a challenge to the University of Texas' affirmative action program, which is used in sorting through applications after the automatic admission of all in-state applicants who graduated in the top 10 percent of their high school class.
Full Story: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/21/supreme-court-affirmative-action-texas_n_1290736.html
Tuesday, February 21, 2012
Statement of the American Association for Affirmative Action
NEWS
Statement of the American Association for Affirmative Action
On the United States Supreme Court’s Decision to Hear the Fisher v. University of Texas Case
Affirmative Action association urges Court to uphold its 2003 decision allowing race as one of many factors in higher education admissions
For Immediate Release: February 21, 2012
Contact: Shirley J. Wilcher
202-349-9855
240-893-9475
Washington, D.C., February 21, 2012 – Today, the U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to grant certiorari in the affirmative action case of Fisher v. University of Texas. The American Association for Affirmative Action (AAAA), an organization of equal opportunity, affirmative action and diversity professionals founded in 1974, urges the Court to follow its own precedent in the Grutter v. Bollinger case in 2003 and continue to hold that diversity in higher education admissions is a compelling state interest. Colleges and universities should be able to consider the whole student, including a student’s race among many factors, to determine who is admitted.
AAAA President Gregory T. Chambers stated: “Now that the Supreme Court has decided to revisit the question of race in admissions decisions, an issue that we hoped had been decided in 2003, we urge the Court to respect its own precedent and uphold the use of race among many factors in higher education admissions.”
“AAAA will actively monitor the briefs and oral arguments offered in the Fisher case,” added Chambers. “As the nation’s demographics indicate, this nation is becoming increasingly diverse and it is not the time to close the doors of opportunity based on race or national origin. Our future depends upon all qualified individuals receiving a chance to compete in education, employment and business.”
Founded in 1974, the American Association for Affirmative Action (AAAA) is a national not-for-profit association of professionals working in the areas of affirmative action, equal opportunity, and diversity. AAAA assists its members to be more successful and productive in their careers. It also promotes understanding and advocacy of affirmative action to enhance access and equality in employment, economic and educational opportunities.
###
www.affirmativeaction.org
American Association for Affirmative Action
888 16th Street, NW
Suite 800
Washington, DC 20006
202.349.9855
Affirmative action in college admissions goes back before Supreme Court
Christian Science Monitor
US Supreme Court is taking an affirmative action case about the University of Texas admissions policy, which permits race to be a factor in deciding which applicants are admitted.
By Warren Richey, Staff writer / February 21, 2012
The US Supreme Court agreed on Tuesday to take up a potential blockbuster case testing the constitutionality of race-based admissions policies at the University of Texas. The case, Fisher v. University of Texas (11-345), is being closely followed by conservative analysts who are hopeful the high court will use the Texas dispute to establish new constitutional limits on race-conscious affirmative action plans at public colleges and universities nationwide.
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Justice/2012/0221/Affirmative-action-in-college-admissions-goes-back-before-Supreme-Court
US Supreme Court is taking an affirmative action case about the University of Texas admissions policy, which permits race to be a factor in deciding which applicants are admitted.
By Warren Richey, Staff writer / February 21, 2012
The US Supreme Court agreed on Tuesday to take up a potential blockbuster case testing the constitutionality of race-based admissions policies at the University of Texas. The case, Fisher v. University of Texas (11-345), is being closely followed by conservative analysts who are hopeful the high court will use the Texas dispute to establish new constitutional limits on race-conscious affirmative action plans at public colleges and universities nationwide.
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Justice/2012/0221/Affirmative-action-in-college-admissions-goes-back-before-Supreme-Court
High court to take new look at affirmative action
Boston.com
By Mark Sherman
Associated Press / February 21, 2012
WASHINGTON—The Supreme Court will once again confront the issue of race in university admissions in a case brought by a white student denied a spot at the flagship campus of the University of Texas. The court said Tuesday it will return to the issue of affirmative action in higher education for the first time since its 2003 decision endorsing the use of race as a factor in admissions. This time around, a more conservative court is being asked to outlaw the use of Texas' affirmative action plan and possibly to jettison the earlier ruling entirely.
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2012/02/21/high_court_to_take_new_look_at_affirmative_action/
By Mark Sherman
Associated Press / February 21, 2012
WASHINGTON—The Supreme Court will once again confront the issue of race in university admissions in a case brought by a white student denied a spot at the flagship campus of the University of Texas. The court said Tuesday it will return to the issue of affirmative action in higher education for the first time since its 2003 decision endorsing the use of race as a factor in admissions. This time around, a more conservative court is being asked to outlaw the use of Texas' affirmative action plan and possibly to jettison the earlier ruling entirely.
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2012/02/21/high_court_to_take_new_look_at_affirmative_action/
Affirmative Action on the Docket
Inside Higher Ed
February 21, 2012 - 10:08am
By
Scott Jaschik
WASHINGTON – The U.S. Supreme Court today agreed to consider whether the University of Texas at Austin has the right to consider race and ethnicity in admissions decisions. Those bringing the case hope the Supreme Court will restrict or even eliminate the right of colleges to consider race in admissions – a prerogative last affirmed by the Supreme Court in 2003 in a case involving the University of Michigan’s law school.
In a sign that is likely to worry supporters of affirmative action (and to cheer critics of the practice), Justice Elena Kagan announced that she took no part in consideration of the appeal seeking a Supreme Court review -- a likely sign that she will not take any part in the actual review. Kagan did not announce why, but conservative legal bloggers have been calling on her to recuse herself because of her work as U.S. solicitor general filing a brief in support of the University of Texas. If she continues to recuse herself, a justice thought to be supportive of affirmative action will not be voting.
Read more: http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2012/02/21/supreme-court-takes-affirmative-action-case#ixzz1n26uJkTj
February 21, 2012 - 10:08am
By
Scott Jaschik
WASHINGTON – The U.S. Supreme Court today agreed to consider whether the University of Texas at Austin has the right to consider race and ethnicity in admissions decisions. Those bringing the case hope the Supreme Court will restrict or even eliminate the right of colleges to consider race in admissions – a prerogative last affirmed by the Supreme Court in 2003 in a case involving the University of Michigan’s law school.
In a sign that is likely to worry supporters of affirmative action (and to cheer critics of the practice), Justice Elena Kagan announced that she took no part in consideration of the appeal seeking a Supreme Court review -- a likely sign that she will not take any part in the actual review. Kagan did not announce why, but conservative legal bloggers have been calling on her to recuse herself because of her work as U.S. solicitor general filing a brief in support of the University of Texas. If she continues to recuse herself, a justice thought to be supportive of affirmative action will not be voting.
Read more: http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2012/02/21/supreme-court-takes-affirmative-action-case#ixzz1n26uJkTj
Monday, January 30, 2012
Supreme Court okays ministerial exception to discrimination law
Lexology.com
Littler Mendelson
Jane Ann Himsel
USA
January 13 2012
In EEOC v. Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church & School, the United States Supreme Court approved a "ministerial exception" to federal anti-discriminations laws. The fact-specific opinion answers some questions, but leaves others – including the exact parameters of the exception – for future litigation.
Ministerial Exception Before Hosanna-Tabor
Both the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 contain exemptions that entitle religious institutions to discriminate on the basis of religion, but they do not entitle such institutions to discriminate on the basis of race, sex, disability, or any other legally protected category. Thus, when an employee of a religious organization sues his or her employer, alleging discrimination because of something other than religion, the first issue to resolve is whether the plaintiff fits within the First-Amendment-based "ministerial exception" originally articulated in McClure v. Salvation Army.1 Under this court-made doctrine, religious organizations must follow antidiscrimination laws with respect to their non-ministerial employees.
Full Story: http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=e27ef0f0-aaed-43ba-bde4-8e26899f08a4&utm_source=Lexology+Daily+Newsfeed&utm_medium=HTML+email+-+Body+-+Federal+section&utm_campaign=Lexology+subscriber+daily+feed&utm_content=Lexology+Daily+Newsfeed+2012-01-25&utm_term=
Littler Mendelson
Jane Ann Himsel
USA
January 13 2012
In EEOC v. Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church & School, the United States Supreme Court approved a "ministerial exception" to federal anti-discriminations laws. The fact-specific opinion answers some questions, but leaves others – including the exact parameters of the exception – for future litigation.
Ministerial Exception Before Hosanna-Tabor
Both the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 contain exemptions that entitle religious institutions to discriminate on the basis of religion, but they do not entitle such institutions to discriminate on the basis of race, sex, disability, or any other legally protected category. Thus, when an employee of a religious organization sues his or her employer, alleging discrimination because of something other than religion, the first issue to resolve is whether the plaintiff fits within the First-Amendment-based "ministerial exception" originally articulated in McClure v. Salvation Army.1 Under this court-made doctrine, religious organizations must follow antidiscrimination laws with respect to their non-ministerial employees.
Full Story: http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=e27ef0f0-aaed-43ba-bde4-8e26899f08a4&utm_source=Lexology+Daily+Newsfeed&utm_medium=HTML+email+-+Body+-+Federal+section&utm_campaign=Lexology+subscriber+daily+feed&utm_content=Lexology+Daily+Newsfeed+2012-01-25&utm_term=
Friday, December 2, 2011
CRP Announces New Book published by UNC Press
The Civil Rights Project-UCLA
Date Published: November 29, 2011
The Civil Rights Project announces the publication of Integrating Schools in a Changing Society: New Policies and Legal Options for a Multiracial Generation, a new book of cutting-edge scholarship on the forces shaping the future of school integration policy following the Supreme Court’s 2007 PICS decision.
The book is designed “to reinvigorate the movement for equality in our multiracial society,” says Co-editor Erica Frankenberg. “It furthers the case for how education policies can be adopted in tandem with other social policies to create a more integrated and equitable society.”Integrating Schools in a Changing Society enhances the discussion already underway about immediate and long-term policy options legally available to the nation’s school districts, many of which remain committed to the ideal of integration as a tool for improving educational opportunity and achievement.
Full Announcement: http://www.civilrightsproject.ucla.edu/news/news-and-announcements/2011-site-news/crp-announces-new-book-published-by-unc-press?utm_source=CRP+Mail+Dump+11.21.2011&utm_campaign=0e48b818ed-template_2_for_announce11_22_2011&utm_medium=email
This Book is Available on the AAAA Bookstore: http://www.affirmativeaction.org/bookstore.html
Date Published: November 29, 2011
The Civil Rights Project announces the publication of Integrating Schools in a Changing Society: New Policies and Legal Options for a Multiracial Generation, a new book of cutting-edge scholarship on the forces shaping the future of school integration policy following the Supreme Court’s 2007 PICS decision.
The book is designed “to reinvigorate the movement for equality in our multiracial society,” says Co-editor Erica Frankenberg. “It furthers the case for how education policies can be adopted in tandem with other social policies to create a more integrated and equitable society.”Integrating Schools in a Changing Society enhances the discussion already underway about immediate and long-term policy options legally available to the nation’s school districts, many of which remain committed to the ideal of integration as a tool for improving educational opportunity and achievement.
Full Announcement: http://www.civilrightsproject.ucla.edu/news/news-and-announcements/2011-site-news/crp-announces-new-book-published-by-unc-press?utm_source=CRP+Mail+Dump+11.21.2011&utm_campaign=0e48b818ed-template_2_for_announce11_22_2011&utm_medium=email
This Book is Available on the AAAA Bookstore: http://www.affirmativeaction.org/bookstore.html
Tuesday, November 15, 2011
Ivy League legacies due for court scrutiny?
CBS MoneyWatch
November 15, 2011 9:33 AM
(MoneyWatch)
COMMENTARY. Should legacy applicants at Ivy League schools continue to enjoy an edge over everybody else?
I think most people -- except perhaps parents with an Ivy League pedigree -- would agree that giving a college admission boost to such "legacies," or family of alumni, is unfair.
The issue of alumni favoritism is bound to resurface in the coming months if the U.S. Supreme Court goes ahead, as expected, and reviews the constitutionality of affirmative action at colleges and universities. I wrote about this likelihood here: Is the End Nearing for Affirmative Action at Universities?
Full Story: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505145_162-57324527/ivy-league-legacies-due-for-court-scrutiny/
November 15, 2011 9:33 AM
(MoneyWatch)
COMMENTARY. Should legacy applicants at Ivy League schools continue to enjoy an edge over everybody else?
I think most people -- except perhaps parents with an Ivy League pedigree -- would agree that giving a college admission boost to such "legacies," or family of alumni, is unfair.
The issue of alumni favoritism is bound to resurface in the coming months if the U.S. Supreme Court goes ahead, as expected, and reviews the constitutionality of affirmative action at colleges and universities. I wrote about this likelihood here: Is the End Nearing for Affirmative Action at Universities?
Full Story: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505145_162-57324527/ivy-league-legacies-due-for-court-scrutiny/
Affirmative Action for the Rich
The New York Times
by Richard Kahlenberg
November 13, 2011
While affirmative action policies for students of color have been the subject of countless books, lawsuits, and voter initiatives, much less attention has been paid to legacy preferences, which benefit a larger number of students. It’s time for the scrutiny to increase and the policies to end.
Rewarding birth rather than merit is un-American and possibly illegal.
Legacy preferences provide the equivalent of a 160 point boost on the math and verbal SATs, not the “tiebreaker” that many universities claim . These preferences disproportionately benefit wealthy white students, providing, in essence, affirmative action for the rich.
Full Story: http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2011/11/13/why-do-top-schools-still-take-legacy-applicants/affirmative-action-for-the-rich
by Richard Kahlenberg
November 13, 2011
While affirmative action policies for students of color have been the subject of countless books, lawsuits, and voter initiatives, much less attention has been paid to legacy preferences, which benefit a larger number of students. It’s time for the scrutiny to increase and the policies to end.
Rewarding birth rather than merit is un-American and possibly illegal.
Legacy preferences provide the equivalent of a 160 point boost on the math and verbal SATs, not the “tiebreaker” that many universities claim . These preferences disproportionately benefit wealthy white students, providing, in essence, affirmative action for the rich.
Full Story: http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2011/11/13/why-do-top-schools-still-take-legacy-applicants/affirmative-action-for-the-rich
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)