College affirmative action back on Supreme Court’s horizon

Affirmative action is preferential treatment of a student applying to a university and is part of an underrepresented minority. In 2003 the Supreme Court approved the preferential treatment expecting it not to necessary in 25 years. This issue has come up again in two different decisions in lower court. In Texas a r ace-conscious admissions policy was attempted to be appealed but was not heard by the whole5th circuit. In Michigan, in 2006 “preferential treatment to any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin” was against the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th amendment. The case is expected to head to the supreme court if it is not resolved in circuit court. In Grant v. Bollinger, a case concerning the University of Michigan, the university's admissions policy is unconstitutional because it gives an automatic 20 points to a needed 100 points to guarantee admission to anyone who is part of an underrepresented minority. In another case, Grutter, however the court ruled in favor of the law school's admissions policy of including race as a legitimate considering factor for admissions. The case closest to approaching the Supreme court is Fisher v. the University of Texas, In which Abigail Fisher and Rachel Michalewicz and their lawyer claim that the use of race in the UT acceptance policy is unnecessary because 30% of the enrolling students are form unrepresented minorities and UT has a race neutral acceptance policy. UT officials say that is not enough though because in the near future there will be no minority and that other determining factors besides race are included in the acceptance policy.

This is a perfect example of citizens using the court pathway of action. The citizens who brought these disagreements to the courts are using the court pathway of action example to change the government to ensure their rights are being acknowledged. If a citizen is unhappy with some injustice in their government or feel that their rights have been violated then they can take a case all the way up to the supreme court. The citizens who felt it was not fair that a person or persons in a underrepresented minority got an extra boost in universities' acceptance policies on race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin took legal action and felt that there rights and equality were being ignored.