Is affirmative action becoming more and more unnecessary in a society that is facing the erasure of a typical minority group?
Are racial relations sufficient enough in the United States to eliminate the need for the preferential treatment of minorities?
With the United States’ past reputation of racial treatment under consideration, is it too early to become a “colorblind” nation, legally?
Does affirmative action further encourage a color-consciousness among society?
These are the many questions that the Supreme Court is currently facing concerning the recently filed lawsuit, Fisher v. University of Texas in Austin
Fisher v. University of Texas in Austin involves the preferential treatment of minorities during the admissions process in institutions of higher education. In other words, plaintiff Abigail Fisher is filing a lawsuit against the University of Texas for denying her admission to the university due to her race. Fisher claims that she was unjustly denied acceptance to the University of Texas because the university’s affirmative action plan gives preference to minorities.
To complicate matters, Supreme Court cases that have occurred in the past 10 years concerning affirmative action in admission decisions tend to lean more toward the interests of minority groups. Many institutions justify the weight of their decision on race by claiming that diversity is among the university’s most important goals. According to many universities, most notably the University of Michigan, a racially diverse student body can only by ensured through the employment of affirmative action plans.
Conversely, Fisher and other anti-affirmative action advocates claim that affirmative action plans introduce a slew of counter-racial issues to the forefront of the university.
For example, because the acceptance being granted to many students is based solely on race, affirmative action arguably encourages both minority and non-minority students to focus less on unbiased forms of consideration such as grade point average and standardized test scores.
Also, many people believe that affirmative action decisions undermine the work that minority students have done while in high school. Because these students are given preferential treatment due to race, their achievements and accolades become nothing more than icing on the cake, essentially.
Another problem to consider is the reversed sense of discrimination that becomes enacted by admission committees. Because a white student does not fit the mold of a school’s affirmative action plan, the student is passed by without adequate consideration and open-ended deliberation. The last issue noted is most relevant to Fisher v. University of Texas in Austin because Fisher is claiming that she has been discriminated by the university because of her race – the ultimate explanation of her rejection, according to Fisher.
However, Fisher and like-minded individuals must realize the cultural implications imbedded in affirmative action decisions. In reality, race is often given so much weight during admission decisions not only because of the university’s goal of reaching diversity but also because of the class disparities that make up the formative educational years of many minority students. Under these circumstances, affirmative action decisions do provide balance and equality for students that lack the financial and geographical advantages of many non-minority students.
Ultimately, the Supreme Court must decide whether Fisher’s race unjustly denied her acceptance to the University of Texas. Because the current Supreme Court members are notably conservative, I believe the case will most likely be ruled in favor of the university based on the fact that affirmative action is not mandatory in many institutions and thus cannot be the main cause for her rejection.