START A PETITION 27,000,000 members: the world's largest community for good
1,465,413 people care about Civil Rights

Why Diversity Still Matters

Why Diversity Still Matters
  • 1 of 2


Written by Julie Ajinkya, Center for American Progress

On Tuesday the Supreme Court agreed to hear a case, Fisher v. The University of Texas, which may challenge the future of race-conscious admissions at our country’s colleges and universities. If the Court bars the use of race in admissions decisions, it threatens years of hard work by civil rights activists in the higher education field who fought to make college campuses more integrated, diverse, and just.

The case being considered by the Court was filed by a young white woman named Abigail Fisher of Texas. Fisher failed to rank in the top 10 percent of her graduating high school class, which would have automatically earned her admission into the state’s public university system. As a result, she was placed in a separate pool of applicants who could be admitted through a complicated admissions process that allows race to be considered as a factor in admissions. When Fisher failed to be admitted to the University of Texas at Austin, the state’s flagship university, she concluded that she was rejected based on her race and sued the university in 2008.

Conservatives hope that this case will overturn the Court’s 2003 Grutter v. Bollinger ruling that allowed schools to use race as one of the factors in achieving racial diversity in their institutions. The Fisher case claims that the current admissions policy in Texas, which was explicitly formed after the 2003 ruling, is an unconstitutional form of “blatant racial balancing.” But such an interpretation of the role of race in admissions reveals a gross misunderstanding of the 2003 Supreme Court ruling and the role of diversity in higher education.

Grutter v. Bollinger

Grutter v. Bollinger was similarly filed by a white female Michigan resident who believed she had been rejected from the University of Michigan Law School based on her race. Ultimately, the Supreme Court’s decision ruled that the U.S. Constitution “does not prohibit the Law School’s narrowly tailored use of race in admissions decisions to further a compelling interest in obtaining the educational benefits that flow from a diverse student body.” The central question, then, is how the Court decided that diversity was a “compelling interest” in the context of higher education.

Justice Sandra O’Connor delivered the opinion of the Court and cited the substantial benefits that educational diversity is designed to produce. O’Connor specifically highlighted numerous studies that “show student body diversity promotes learning outcomes…better prepares students for an increasingly diverse workforce and society, and better prepares them as professionals.”

Various sectors came forward as amici to make this argument. Major American businesses argued that today’s global marketplace requires skills that can only be developed through exposure to widely diverse people. The U.S. military argued that a highly qualified and racially diverse officer corps is essential to the military’s ability to provide national security. And legislators came forward to argue that the path to leadership must be open to individuals of every race and ethnicity to cultivate a set of leaders with legitimacy in the eyes of our citizenry.

What the 2003 ruling did allow was the law school’s admissions program to continue considering race as one factor among many, a point that is sadly lost on Fisher and the conservatives pushing for the ruling to be overturned during the Supreme Court’s fall docket. What the ruling did not allow was for race to be the defining feature in a student’s application, or to operate under a quota system that would impose a fixed number of admission slots that are reserved exclusively for certain racial or ethnic groups. Moreover, the ruling did not require schools to consider race, but it allowed them to—an important distinction that means schools that implement such admissions policies clearly agree that diversity is enough of a compelling interest to pursue in their classrooms.

A political moment

So why do Fisher and the opponents of affirmative action think the Court would rule differently this time around?

  • 1 of 2

Read more: , , , ,

Photo from afagen via flickr

have you shared this story yet?

some of the best people we know are doing it


+ add your own
6:34AM PST on Feb 26, 2012

You can't learn about something you are never exposed to...without diversity, students will be unprepared to be successful in global markets and international industries..........

11:00PM PST on Feb 25, 2012

Race should not be a factor anymore. We are plenty "diverse" & forcing more "diversity" only serves to cause more racial friction. Strike this BS down!

12:17PM PST on Feb 25, 2012

When we continue to have systemtic institutional racial bais in the country I think it would be a travesty to undo something that is working.

11:25AM PST on Feb 25, 2012

I have no sympathy for this woman. Had she done well enough in school it wouldn't have been an issue. She should look to her own role in this scenario instead of looking for someone to blame because she didn't get into her first choice college.

11:21AM PST on Feb 25, 2012

I'm more concerned about the GOP Catholic/Christian Nazi billionaires who stole the American Dream and took down our economy. We're an inch away from being a third world country. I believe in fairness. All super smart kids should be able to go to college no matter what color their skin is. Is this kid suing for political reasons only? Maybe she should have gotten in the top 10% and then she would have gotten into her precious "flagstate" university. Does their flag have KKK on it?

10:33AM PST on Feb 25, 2012

People should be admitted or hired based on their qualifications only.

8:14AM PST on Feb 25, 2012

diversity isn't going anywhere

6:43AM PST on Feb 25, 2012

I am sorry, I really get impatient with evolution. This story should be hundreds of years old. Mankind is taking too long to mature. I wonder if intelligent beings on other worlds go through the same stupid times like here on earth?

6:41AM PST on Feb 25, 2012

It's the best plan for long range goals. Stocks, bonds, and alternative investments with periodic rebalancing is the best way to maximize returns. Some prefer a balanced approach with as many whites, blacks, oranges, reds, blues, yellows, browns, and of course rainbows work well too.

6:20AM PST on Feb 25, 2012

Still matters because it's still there and always will be.

add your comment

Disclaimer: The views expressed above are solely those of the author and may not reflect those of
Care2, Inc., its employees or advertisers.

Care2 - Be Extraordinary - Start a Care2 Petition
ads keep care2 free

Recent Comments from Causes

The Sheree Guthrie of this article has a baby and is pregnant again. She states, "“They don’t…

ads keep care2 free

Select names from your address book   |   Help

We hate spam. We do not sell or share the email addresses you provide.

site feedback


Problem on this page? Briefly let us know what isn't working for you and we'll try to make it right!