Craig A. Thompson, The Daily Record Newswire
The Supreme Court is considering a case that could change the landscape of higher education for years to come.
Fisher v. University of Texas has its roots in a case filed by Abigail Fisher, who applied to the University of Texas at Austin in 2008 and was denied admission. She alleged that the university had discriminated against her on the basis of her race in violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.
Fisher, now 22 and in her final year at Louisiana State University, argued that the University of Texas’ consideration of race in the admissions process was the basis of her rejection and that less qualified students of color were admitted in her place. She asserted that the affirmative action policy of the university was a barrier to her receiving an education at UT Austin.
The University of Texas responded by asserting that Fisher was not eligible for admission under academic guidelines that had nothing to do with her race.
The university system in Texas had used and continues to use a program called “The Top 10 Percent Plan,” which guides admission to public
universities. Consequently, the top 10 percent of each graduating high school class in the state — in both academics and test scores — are automatically admitted to the public universities to which they apply.
Because many school districts in the state remain segregated, the plan allows for greater diversity in the university classrooms. Eighty-one percent of the 2008 freshman class gained admission under that policy. The remaining open slots are determined by other non-academic merits, including racial diversity.
Not automatically eligible
The university argued that because Fisher was not automatically eligible for admission based on her grades and test scores under The Top 10 Percent Plan, other factors were taken into consideration for her application. Fisher cited her extracurricular activities — soccer and cello — and the fact that her parents attended the university as factors that should have set her above other applicants.
In 2009, the U.S. District Court upheld the university’s admissions policy and determined that it met the standards in Grutter v. Bollinger, decided by the Supreme Court in 2003. A Fifth Circuit panel concurred with that ruling, and an additional en banc panel voted against reviewing the previous panel’s decision.
Questions regarding diversity, school districts, K-12 education and more will be considered and acted upon as a result of the final decision in this case. As discussed in previous columns, the need to discuss the importance of race and how best to deal with our nation’s continuing challenges associated with matters of race is paramount.
While the justices of the Supreme Court consider this matter in the context of higher education, our local and national leadership must continue to deal openly and candidly with the harsh realities in many of our neighborhoods, particularly as they relate to K-12 education.
In addition, every citizen can play a role in ensuring that our young people grow fully into their potential.
In Maryland, organizations such as Living Classrooms, Maryland Mentoring Partnership, Big Brothers Big Sisters and many others are taking the lead in providing educational and mentoring opportunities for a significant number of our youth.
Churches, civic organizations and business-sponsored programs are recognizing the importance of focusing on youth development for both our social and economic futures.
Even members of the state’s prison population have stepped up to do more, with groups such as the Extra Legalese Group at the Jessup Correctional Institution hosting and supporting various “peace initiatives” inside and outside of the JCI and working to engage current and former gang members to be a part of the solution.
Unexpected source
A group at the JCI even recently collected funds to purchase school supplies for students in the Collington Square area of Baltimore. The efforts of all of these groups play a role in helping shape the minds and world views of the next generation of leaders who apply to our colleges and universities.
Whatever the outcome of the Fisher case, it is more critical than ever that we all pitch in to develop our youth during their pre-college years. The skills, lessons and values learned from us will assist in developing them into the best college students possible.
To the extent that the court determines that race is less of an important factor in determining admission to college, we can assure that all of our young people have the exposure and experiences necessary to meet whatever definition of “diversity” is ultimately determined to be relevant by the Supreme Court.
—————
Craig A. Thompson, who writes a monthly column for The Daily Record, is a partner at Venable LLP and represents clients in the areas of commercial litigation, products liability and personal injury. He is the chair of the firm’s diversity committee. He is also the host of a weekly two-way talk radio show, and the author of a series of children’s books on African-American history. His e-mail address is CAThompson@Venable.com.
