Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The Supreme Court's recent ruling to overturn affirmative action means that Colleges and universities can no longer consider race in admission policies. Here how the ruling affects students.
The U.S. Supreme Court's landmark decision Thursday striking down affirmative action has intensified angst among many higher education leaders who say extending access to a diversity of students ...
The opinion summarized that Fisher I set three controlling principles: strict scrutiny of affirmative-action admissions processes, judicial deference to reasoned explanations of the decision to pursue student body diversity, and no judicial deference for the determination of whether the use of race in admissions processes is narrowly tailored ...
Opposition to affirmative action emerged in the neoconservative journal The Public Interest, particularly with editor Nathan Glazer's 1975 book Affirmative Discrimination: Ethnic Inequality and Public Policy. [24] In the Roberts Court, Chief Justice John Roberts questioned the benefits of diversity in a physics class in Fisher II. [25]
A recent poll from the Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research found that over 60% of Americans are in favor of affirmative action in college admissions and don’t support ...
[18] [19] There were concerns that if the Court overruled Grutter, affirmative action at public universities would end in the United States. [10] Some argued that the result of such a ruling would decrease the number of black and Hispanic students admitted to American universities while increasing the proportion of white and Asian students.
Colleges are confirming fears held since the Supreme Court decision against affirmative action, with multiple schools reporting significant declines in Black and Hispanic students among this year ...
[29] Regarding the distinction between Congress preventing the states from taking an action and Congress requiring the states to take an action, Alito wrote, "This distinction is empty. It was a matter of happenstance that the laws challenged in New York and Printz commanded "affirmative" action as opposed to imposing a prohibition.