The U.S. Supreme Court today affirmed the University of Texas at Austin's admissions program, which permits consideration of an applicant’s race as one of a number of factors in admissions decisions. Justice Kennedy authored the majority opinion in the 4-3 decision in Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin.

The Court underscored that an educational institution may institute a race-conscious admissions program as a means of obtaining "the educational benefits that flow from student diversity," though such a program is subject to strict scrutiny. The Court noted that prior to the University of Texas adopting its current admissions program, the University engaged in a year-long study of the effectiveness of its use of race-neutral policies and programs. The Court found that in the absence of "available and workable" race-neutral alternatives, the University developed its current program, in which it conducts a holistic review of admissions applications.

In describing the "sensitive balance" that educational institutions face, the Court noted that "considerable deference is owed" to educational institutions in defining characteristics, like student diversity, that are central to institutions’ missions and identities. Despite this deference, the Court’s opinion makes clear that the constitutionality of admissions policies that consider race as a factor will be scrutinized closely. Educational institutions may wish to review current admissions policies in light of the Fisher decision.

Attorneys in Ballard Spahr's Higher Education Group regularly assist clients with compliance matters under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, Title IX of the Education Amendments, the Americans with Disabilities Act, and related laws.


Copyright © 2016 by Ballard Spahr LLP.
www.ballardspahr.com
(No claim to original U.S. government material.)

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, including electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without prior written permission of the author and publisher.

This alert is a periodic publication of Ballard Spahr LLP and is intended to notify recipients of new developments in the law. It should not be construed as legal advice or legal opinion on any specific facts or circumstances. The contents are intended for general informational purposes only, and you are urged to consult your own attorney concerning your situation and specific legal questions you have.

Related Practices