Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
In September 2011, lawyers representing Fisher filed petition seeking review from the Supreme Court. [13] [17] On February 21, 2012, the court granted certiorari in Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin. The Supreme Court heard the oral argument in October 2012, and handed down its decision on June 24, 2013.
Fisher v. University of Texas, 570 U.S. 297 (2013), also known as Fisher I (to distinguish it from the 2016 case), [1] is a United States Supreme Court case concerning the affirmative action admissions policy of the University of Texas at Austin.
Fisher v. University of Texas may refer to either of two United States Supreme Court cases: Fisher v. University of Texas (alternatively called Fisher I), 570 U.S. 297 (2013), a case which ruled that strict scrutiny should be applied to determine the constitutionality of a race-sensitive admissions policy. Fisher v.
His litigation includes United States Supreme Court cases Bush v. Vera (1996), Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District No. 1 v. Holder (2009), Fisher v. University of Texas (2013), Shelby County v. Holder (2013), Evenwel v. Abbott (2016), and Fisher v. University of Texas II (2016).
In 2009, Sparks heard Fisher v. University of Texas, a case challenging the admissions policy of the University of Texas at Austin. He upheld UT's policy under Grutter v. Bollinger. [13] In 2012 the court commemorated his 20 years served on the federal bench and marked the occasion with a portrait painted by artist Michele Rushworth.
Get AOL Mail for FREE! Manage your email like never before with travel, photo & document views. Personalize your inbox with themes & tabs. You've Got Mail!
Discover the best free online games at AOL.com - Play board, card, casino, puzzle and many more online games while chatting with others in real-time.
In 2012, Fisher v. University of Texas reached the Supreme Court. [20] The University of Texas allegedly used race as a factor in denying Abigail Fisher's application, denying her a fair review. The lower courts upheld the program, but the Supreme Court vacated the judgment of the lower courts and sent the case back to the Fifth Circuit for review.