After the recent constitutional horror show
, the Supreme Court acted appropriately in granting certiorari in a case that could further the end of pernicious racial favoritism in college admissions.
Judicial Watch, in partnership with frequent amicus brief partner, the Allied Educational Foundation (AEF), filed an amicus brief earlier this year supporting the request to the court to take up the issue
Since 2005, the University of Texas at Austin has used race in its admissions process, purportedly to achieve greater diversity in its student body. Applicants to the university are currently required to complete and submit a standardized “Apply Texas” application, which requires applicants to identify themselves by race, and state whether they are of “Hispanic or Latino” ethnicity.
Abigail Fisher was denied admission to UT in 2008. She filed suit, alleging that the university had discriminated against her and co-plaintiff Rachel Multer Michalewicz because of their race.
In January 2011, the Fifth Circuit Court ruled in favor of UT, prompting Fisher to appeal the decision to the U.S. Supreme Court. In June 2013, the Supreme Court ruled that the Fifth Circuit had failed to apply “strict scrutiny” to the university’s race-based admissions policy, remanding the case to the circuit court, which on July 15, 2014, again ruled in favor of UT.
Now, the Supreme Court will once again review the Fifth Circuit’s rubber-stamping of UT’s race-based admissions program.
Of course, liberals at the Supreme Court helped created this racialist approach to educational opportunity.
In 2003, the Supreme Court ruled that race-based admissions policies at the University of Michigan School of Law were constitutional. Hopefully that decision will be subjected to fresh scrutiny when the current Supreme Court considers the Fisher case during the term that begins in October 2015.
The Supreme Court can’t act soon enough. As Judicial Watch argued in its most recent brief: "Human race and ethnicity are inherent ambiguous social constructs that have no validity in science. Invoking race and ethnicity to promote diversity relies on racial and ethnic stereotyping of individuals’ viewpoints, backgrounds, and experiences.
"Admission policies, such as the policy enacted by the University, which seek to classify applicants by crude, inherently ambiguous, and unsound racial and ethnic categories to promote diversity, but which instead promote racial and ethnic stereotyping, can never be narrowly tailored to promote a compelling government interest."
By repeatedly refusing to uphold the basic right to equal protection under the law, the Fifth Circuit Court is attempting to turn pseudoscience into settled law, despite the Supreme Court’s ruling to the contrary.
The University of Texas should focus on educating its students rather than running a divisive and unlawful racial spoils program.
The admissions policies of the University of Texas at Austin are at odds with the Constitution and promote racial theories that have no basis in science. It is time for the Supreme Court to apply the U.S. Constitution and law so as to put an end to this unlawful practice.
Tom Fitton is the president of Judicial Watch. He is a nationally recognized expert on government corruption. A former talk radio and television host and analyst, Tom is well known across the country as a national spokesperson for the conservative cause. He has been quoted in Time, Vanity Fair, The Washington Post, The New York Times, and most every other major newspaper in the country. For more of his reports, Go Here Now.
© 2021 Newsmax. All rights reserved.