The Supreme Court heard Abigail Noel Fisher’s case against the University of Texas at Austin on Oct. 10.
This case comes 50 years after the landmark affirmative action case Herman Marion Sweatt v. University of Texas Law School verdict was delivered.
Both cases are about affirmative action, but the obvious difference is the race of the plaintiffs.
Fisher feels that the affirmative action standards violate her rights as a member of a non-minority race.
But honestly, who cares? Fisher was not admitted to an institution that is 51 percent white. Boo-hoo.
It is interesting to me that she blames the university’s policy on admitting minority students for her not getting in.
According to the University of Texas at Austin, the highest percentage of minority students admitted last year was 17.6 percent. These students were Hispanic.
Fisher sued the university because their “individualized, discretionary admission policies” violated her rights and favor African-American, Hispanic and Asian applicants.
This statement confused me. Typically, when someone shows favor to a group of people, this means they are preferred over another group. If a university is predominantly white, which group are they favoring?
Some say that in a nation with an African-American president, affirmative action is irrelevant. I beg to differ. Race is still a prevalent issue in the United States. Look at the presidential election. If people are wearing T-shirts that read “Put the white back in the White House” at Mitt Romney rallies, then race is still an issue.
This case scratched the surface of many underlying issues, issues that some believe we have surpassed and others have simply swept under the rug. I can’t help but wonder about the future of affirmative action and, honestly, the future of historically black institutions.
I hope that America will come to a point where the racially ignorant do not consider themselves the majority, and the racially disenfranchised have a say in what schools they attend.