Supreme Court Rules on Fisher vs. U-Texas: Back to Lower Court
Monday, June 24, 2013
This morning, the Supreme Court announced opinions on a few key cases, including:
- In the affirmative action case Fisher vs. University of Texas, the court will send the case back to a lower court. SCOTUSBlog reports that this indicates "the majority seems to reaffirm that diversity is a compelling interest if only because that rule was not challenged by the plaintiffs in the case."
- The court announced that it will hear a case this Fall about the constitutionality of President Obama's recess appointments.
- Several pro-business rulings on the scope of the Civil Rights Act when it comes to workplace harassment.
We discuss the rulings and the impact with University of Chicago's Geoffrey Stone.
Get Up To Speed on the Key Decisions: Our SCOTUS Reading List
- The Affirmative Action Case (Decided Today):
A white plaintiff, denied admission, claims that University of Texas’s policy of taking race and class into account when admitting students constitutes racial discrimination.
Fisher Ruling (PDF) | WNYC Explainer | Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin (Scotus Blog) | Sherrilyn Ifill Op-Ed (NYTimes) | Valerie Strauss Response to Iffil (Washington Post)
- The Voter Registration Case (Decided Last Week): Read the Decision | More on Arizona vs. The Inter Tribal Council of Arizona (Scotus Blog)
- The Gene Patenting Case (Decided Last Week): Noah Feldman's Analysis | The Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc. | Full Decision (PDF)
- The Same-Sex Marriage Cases:
-- Hollingsworth vs. Perrry: Challenges Prop. 8, which amended the California state constitution to allow only opposite-sex couples to marry.
-- Windsor vs. United States: Challenges the federal definition that marriage — and the associated benefits — is between a man and a woman.
USA Today Primer | WNYC Breakdown | United States v. Windsor (Scotus Blog) | Holligsworth v. Perry (Scotus Blog)
- The Voting Rights Act Case:
On Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, which mandates that certain parts of the country get “preclearance” from the federal government before making election law changes.
Primer from The Root | Heritage's Shelby 101 | Shelby County v. Holder (Scotus Blog)
- The Indian Adoption Case: Adoptive Couple v. Baby Girl (Scotus Blog) | "Adoptive Couple v. Baby Girl" (Radiolab)