The case of Fisher vs. Texas Affirmative Action was used as a defense in a race matter. Affirmative Action was created in order to make sure that certain populations or groups of people of specific race are not outnumbered by the predominant people. It came into existence in order to battle discrimination that was developing in the last decades.
It also includes gender and allows for specific criteria to be used when selecting people for employment or other reasons. Initially, supreme courts were defending places that implemented such policies due to the fact that there was a group that would negatively interact with the minority at a specific location. This led to many cases that were won according to the procedures.
Fisher vs. Texas has established case law through another matter—Grutter v. Bollinger, which was of the same scope. As a result, a Caucasian woman was rejected to enroll in University of Texas according to her race. This was thought to be a positive influence on the local community, but she decided to file an appeal. It is crucial to note that as soon as the Affirmative Action policy was implemented, it raised some debate with regard to its ethics and morals.
This criticism is far reaching, as all the cases were handled with due process and fairness of the law. From one point it is difficult to see how any segregation can be a positive thing. Not allowing any group to de admitted, even if there is a greater number of people of any race, is still discrimination.[1]
This case is important because it has historical significance in relation to other similar cases, especially amongst teaching institutions. People should not be denied education in case they are different from the desired group. Also, it is close to impossible to establish if there are any benefits is segregating certain underrepresented groups within a community. There are various constitutional issues that are connected to this legislation.
These arguments focus on the consistency of the legislation with the constitution. This policy needs to be amended because it violates the rights of people. The criteria for deciding whether the policy should be adjusted are to be established, so that the evaluation for probability of representation is conducted in tandem with the court hearing. The court should apply the law to those areas where discrimination is harming people and preventing them from getting into a community.
At the same time, the circumstances of the case play an important role, as even sometimes there could be factors that might turn out to be negative. For example, if the woman would be harassed because of the particular environment she was getting herself in, it could be wiser to acknowledge the possibility that it will happen.
As long as she received the proper knowledge about the situation and gets a chance to decide for herself, then it would be appropriate. Overall, the system should consider the reasons and the existing consequences. The Affirmative Action policy works only for special cases. Its weaknesses outweigh the perceived benefits.
The initiation of this policy reflects a fault in the judiciary system, as it fails to live up to the expectation of the society and the multicultural location of some public institutions. Not to mention that is clearly victimizes individuals who are rightfully entitled to freedom and a fair chance at employment or education. Changes in the facilities must be made to ensure that people undergo environmental assimilation once they pass through the system.[2]
If the matter was upheld, the society would be affected in a negative way. Places where people of specific race would want to exclude everyone else would appear. This would provide for unfair distribution of resources and access to specific facilities or other places. The society must understand that visual differences are only topical and in order to change the social fabric of a nation, people must be educated about the true differences between people and the value of race.
The court has to perceive a high degree surety that the probability of the personal, physical or mental harm is inevitable. However, there is sometimes likelihood that a judge may commit fundamental attribution error in his or her decision to apply Affirmative Action, leading to unfair treatment and rights violations. Sometimes the evidence presented points in the wrong direction and does not allow objective and fair decision to be made.
People of social and psychological education are often instrumental in providing testimony, but their perspective or recollection of events might be skewed from the truth. Sufficient studies and research must be objectionable and give full credit to people who want to enter a specific community that might want to implement the policy. Overall, each case is unique and should be closely taken apart.
Bibliography
Barnett, Hilarie. Constitutional & Administrative Law. London, England: Routledge, 2012.
“Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin et al.” Supreme Court of the United States, 2012. Web.
Footnotes
- “Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin et al.” Supreme Court of the United States, 2012.
- Hilaire Barnett. Constitutional & Administrative Law. (London, England: Routledge, 2012).