The challenge to the fourteenth amendment and its “equal protection under the law” used to argue Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka is at the crux of Abigail Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin. The case, which was re-argued before the Supreme Court December 9, 2015 and is to be decided during the 2015-2016 term, challenges the role of race in the college admissions process.
Abigail Fisher, a white woman now 25 and a graduate of University of Louisiana, was denied admission in 2008 to the University of Texas at Austin on what her claim alleges is racial discrimination. Her 2008 suit alleges violation of the 14th amendments Equal Protection Clause whereby she was denied her equal protection under the law. Her argument contends that race used in regards to admission is discriminatory and her lack of acceptance was on the basis of race. Abigail Fisher, in disregarding the fact that the University guarantees acceptance to the top 10% of any graduating Texas high school senior regardless of their race and that 80% of their students are admitted under this policy, alleges that her failure to gain admission as one of the remaining 20% was solely race related.
Fisher’s claim, which alleges she was denied admission and her spot was given to a lesser deserving minority student, lacks substantiate proof. Fisher fails to note both her 1180 SAT score was a mere 40 points over the 25th percentile of the incoming class of 2008. She also fails to recognize that race is just one of a plethora of criteria considered by the University in its holistic admissions process to admit 20% of the class not covered by the 10% rule.
Her initial Supreme Court case in 2012, whereby the Court upheld the use of race as one of many factors in admissions was, remanded back to the lower court and then further denied. Fisher returned to the Supreme Court on December 9th, 2015 with a decision expected in 2016. The results, which could have the Supreme Court either remanding the case back to the lower courts, overturning Grutter vs. Bollinger and affirmative action in its entirety or upholding their initial findings that race is one facet of admissions, does not deny Fisher her “equal protections”.
The relevancy of Abigail Fishers case hinges upon her failure and disappointment. If the Supreme Court votes in her favor she may find herself the unwitting victim of further discrimination as a white woman. President Kennedy’s 1961 Executive order to ensure equal treatment “…, without regard to their race, creed, color, or national origin…” did not include gender until 1967. In a nation where “…all MEN are created equal...” she fails to recognize women were at the forefront of civil rights movement 150 years ago. Although in her case it would appear that the only damage is to her ego and little else.
