The Supreme Court’s latest term kicked off on October 1, and in the midst of all-nighters and mojito nights, every college student should pay attention to these issues surrounding our highest judicial body.
1. Affirmative Action
Summary and Background: One of the Court’s biggest cases this upcoming year is Fisher v. Texas. Abigail Fisher, a white woman from Texas, is suing the University of Texas over their affirmative action policy, claiming it violates the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment. The Court has a long history of affirmative action cases, usually modifying standards for college admissions with every new case. Ever since the famous Harlan dissent in Plessy v. Ferguson, the Court has treated race extremely carefully, only judging citizens based on race in the most necessary of circumstances.
In this case, the two sets of lawyers are not arguing whether or not affirmative action itself is constitutional, because the precedent solidly establishes that diverse student bodies are important enough to warrant discrimination. In fact, both sides would agree on this issue given their merit briefs here and here. Fisher’s lawyers are simply arguing that this case is distinct from Grutter v. Bollinger, a case from 2002 that defined affirmative action policies for colleges across the country.
Despite common assumptions, the Court supports affirmative action because of the overall benefit to education provided by diversity, not as compensation for past wrongs like slavery. (The historical argument falls apart when you consider minority students who immigrated to the United States fairly recently. See this interesting research.) The question before the Court today is whether or not the University of Texas admissions policy adheres to the standards outlined in Grutter.
The Court will have to answer several important questions before reaching a decision, several of which every college student can relate to. First, whether or not the policy is necessary to achieve diversity. If not, then the policy would be unconstitutional because it would subject citizens to racial discrimination without good reason. As a college student, if your school took away affirmative action, would you notice? Would your education be worse off? One interesting angle outlined in this amicus brief is whether or not affirmative action is even beneficial to minorities overall.
Second, whether or not the fact that being Asian has a negative impact on your admissions chances. At UT, there are more Hispanic students than Asian students, yet Hispanic students are given the edge in admissions. If your student body had a similar racial breakdown, what would enhance your educational experience more? Having more Hispanic students or more Asian students?
Third, whether or not the University’s definition of critical mass is constitutional given the court’s previous rulings. Essentially, when do you know when the affirmative action policy has worked and you no longer need it? The Court ruled that you must have a definitive timeline and end goal and you cannot base your standards off of the racial demographics of your surrounding region, also known as racial balancing. The university will have to demonstrate a satisfactory definition of critical mass of minority students in order to justify their side.
Potential Action: My prediction is that the Court will rule in favor of Fisher with the five Republican-appointed justices leading the way. Justice Elena Kagan has recused herself from the case (which means she won’t vote) because she was involved in it earlier in her career as U.S. solicitor general, giving the other liberal justices even more of an uphill battle. Chief Justice John Roberts, Justice Samuel Alito, Justice Antonin Scalia, and Justice Clarence Thomas all voted against affirmative action in Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle, ending their opinion with, “The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.”
Justice Anthony Kennedy, who voted with the majority in Parents Involved, may be the only person who can save affirmative action overall and limit the ruling to a more refined admissions process. Still, chances for UT look slim.
Impact on College Students: Depending on the ruling, this decision could have drastic implications for public school admissions. There is also a possibility that the Court’s ruling will affect private institutions under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 in Heart of Atlanta Motel v. United States, although it is unlikely. Many college-affiliated groups are heavily invested in the outcome of Fisher, as demonstrated by the huge number of friendly briefs submitted to the Court. College basketball coaches have filed amicus briefs , arguing in support of UT’s affirmative action policy. Many colleges have submitted briefs as well, including California Institute of Technology, Brown, and University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Harvard also submitted a brief, as described in this Crimson story. The SAT and AP administrators at the College Board even shared their thoughts with the justices. 
2. Election 2012
Whomever America elects this November may have a huge influence on the lives of every current college student. With four justices in their seventies, the next four years could very likely witness a turnover at the highest court in the land. The next president may have the power to cement his political views on our generation long after he steps down in 2016 if he has the opportunity to pick one—or more—new justices. In many ways, your vote matters most in this race if you are a college student; you may be deciding hundreds of closely divided and critical Court decisions for the rest of your lifetime.
The current breakdown is generally considered to be four conservatives, four liberals, and Justice Kennedy, the swing vote. (Roberts may have become a swing vote himself given his surprise ruling in the health care case last spring.) And although Intrade pegs Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the oldest member of the Court, with a 97.5 percent chance of being the next justice to step down, liberal Steven Breyer, conservative Antonin Scalia and Kennedy are all in their mid-seventies. Although none of the justices have shown any hint that they might retire, the political leanings of the next president may prompt them to retire in order to help control the future makeup of the Court. Even one Justice slot switching partisan sides could drastically alter many future decisions, especially given the number of 5-4 rulings (see this crazy graph).
3. Voter ID Reform:
Although there are no cases currently on this year’s schedule regarding voter identification, the sweep of ID reform controversies across state Supreme Courts hints that the top Justices may visit the issue soon. In Crawford v. Marion County Election Board, the Court ruled six against three in support of an Indiana law requiring valid identification in order to cast a ballot. Nevertheless, particularly as the Presidential race becomes increasingly close, the Justices may decide to take action.
Regardless of your political views on the subject, as a college student, this is an issue you should care about. The youth vote will be critical in November, and with turnouts high, campaigns are intent on securing your vote. But many voter ID laws specifically exclude college IDs, making it even harder for students caught between midterms and tailgates to find the time to cast their ballot.
Whether or not SCOTUSblog is your homepage or you have a few minutes after (or during) lecture, take the time to look into these instrumental Supreme Court issues. After all, John Roberts took Expos too.
Photo Credits: flickr.com (all images)
© 2024 Harvard Political Review. All rights reserved.