More handpicked essays just for you.
Lack of diversity in universities
Affirmative action : a problem or a remedy
Affirmative action in college admissions
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
The fourteenth amendment states in the equal protection clause that states may not discriminate against any citizen for any reason, and must allow the same privileges, rights, and conservation. Hogan was on a mission to gain relief as well as compensation for the damages caused. The case was argued on March 22, 1982. The argument from Joe Hogan was proposed by advocate, Wilbur Colom. The petitioner’s side was presented by Hunter M. Gholson, in representation for Mississippi University for Women.
Driver of vehicle 1, Renneker stated she picked up four customers for a carriage ride before traveling southbound on South Leonor K Sullivan Boulevard. Renneker said she observed the bridle over the horse eyes fall off; at which, she stopped and exited the carriage to reapply them. Renneker said she advised the passnegers to exit the carriage while she was reapply the bridle. Renneker said as she was reappling the bridle a helicopter took off from the landing paid and she believed it spooked the hourse. Renneker said the house took off running southbound on South Leonor K Sullivan.
Gene Brucker offers insight into the lives and minds of 15th century Italy through a court case about Giovanni and Lusanna’s involving the legality of their marriage. He utilized several primary sources to provide a descriptive narrative of this case. Even though Brucker used primary sources, primarily notarial sources, these show clear evidence of bias, and in turn these biases are reflected in his work. To begin with, Brucker’s primary material falls into the legal category, notarial sources, from Ser Filippo Mazzaei. Although these legal works supply the evidence and court battle that occurred, these don’t provide a clear voice to the defendant, Giovanni, nor the plaintiff, Lusanna.
In 1950, in the Sweatt v. Painter and McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents cases, the Court struck down segregation of African American students in law and graduate schools. The Justice Department, in its brief to the Court, said it believed Plessy was unconstitutional and should be overturned. NAACP Legal Defense Fund lawyers, led by Thurgood Marshall, began to devise a strategy that would force the Court to re-examine the constitutionality of the separate-but-equal doctrine (2015 The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights/The Leadership Conference Education Fund). Thomas Madison had every right to go that college, he met every schoo. 1978:
Business Law Case Study Essay: Burwell v. Hobby Lobby, 573 U.S (2014) Facts: The Green family runs and owns Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., a national arts and skills chain that has over 500 stores and they have over 13,000 employees. Other facts of the case are that the Green family has been able to organize the business around the values of the Christian faith and has explicitly expressed the desire to run the company as told by Biblical principles, one of which is the belief that the utilization of contraception is wicked. Also, the facts show that under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA), occupation -founded group health care plans must offer certain sorts of preventative care, for example, FDA-accepted contraceptive approaches.
After carefully reviewing the oral argument and brief of case 14-191, Abigail Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin, I was impressed how well the plaintiff attorney argued her defense during the trail. The litigations were as stated, in 2008, the UT Austin enrollment department wrongfully denied admission based upon the school considered race discrimination in its admission process because Fisher was a white female student, and because of her inadequate academic achievements. Fisher lawyer focus adequately on the highlight of the case by persuading the court that she would have gotten accepted into the university if she wasn’t stereotyped on such matters: race, top 10 percent student, grades, test scores which she refer to as personal achievement index. UT at Austin attorneys really didn’t have much leading factories to propose a concrete objective. In the argument Fisher attorney used the Justice Powell‘s example on Bakke system to support is statement.
The equal protection clause dictates that the Federal government must grant, “the equal protection of the law” to all U.S. citizens. Through this clause, affirmative action was developed, but only under certain circumstances; for a law dealing with discrimination to be upheld, it must be reasonable, must further a state objective, and must be a compelling state objective. In the case Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin, the debate is whether or not promoting educational diversity is a compelling state objective. The use of race in college admissions is found to be unconstitutional.
The case that Stephen G. Breyer that he was really active in was United States v. Lopez. This case a twelfth grader bring a gun to school. “[He was] charged under Texas law with possession of a firearm on school premises.” (Tobin 96) The state’s charges were dropped when federal agents accused him of breaking the Gun-Free School Zone Act of 1990. The Boy ended up getting probation.
Justice Ruth Ginsburg wrote the dissenting opinion in which she argued the the University treats race as merely one factor in the overall decision to admit a student, which is permissible under previous judicial precedent. The significance of this case is that the decision challenged the precedent set by previous
In 1945, the High Court of Australia heard the case of Gratwick v Johnson and ultimately decided to dismiss the appeal in a unanimous decision by the Judges. While different reasoning was employed, all five judges drew the conclusion that the appeal should be dismissed as the statute the defendant was charged under was inconsistent with s.92 of the Australian Constitution. To provide some context for this case in 1944, Dulcie Johnson was charged with an offence against the National Security Act 1939-1943 in that she did contravene par.3 of the Restriction of Interstate Passenger Transport Order by travelling from South Australia to Western Australia by rail. In brief terms par.3 of the Restriction of Interstate Passenger Transport Order provided that no person shall, without a valid permit, travel from state to state or territory.
Two cases that were more surprising to learn about than others were; the Ingraham v. Wright (1977) and Grutter v. Bollinger (2003). The Ingraham v. Wright (1977) case because of how the principal hurt the child and didn't have proof. The Grutter v. Bollinger case was surprising because I didn't know that you colleges be unexpected because of race in 2003. The cases that I most agree with ruling are; Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District (1969) and Kent v. United States (1966).
Hunter Johnson CRN 10774 Term Paper Political Actors are not just any elected officials, but they can be any organization, group, or person that has an influence on any political issue. In the Texas affirmative action case, many political actors are involved. Edward Blum runs a group who is working on ending affirmative action. He was along side Abigail Fisher helping her though this case. Another political actor was Justice Clarence Thomas.
In Regents of University of California v. Bakke (1978), the Supreme Court ruled that a university 's use of racial "quotas" in its admissions process was unconstitutional, but a school 's use of "affirmative action" to accept more minority applicants was constitutional in some circumstances. " The college was asked to at least consider blacks in the admittance of college and they were asked to not use quotas in the admission
Part III applies the Court’s precedent to the University’s affirmative action policy and concludes that the policy violates the Equal Protection Clause. Part IV examines the impact of Fisher II on existing affirmative action policies and concludes that the Court’s holding will be narrowly crafted and thus negligibly impact other policies. In addition, Part IV asserts that the Court’s affirmative action jurisprudence should be fundamentally altered because it fails to adequately guide lower courts, legislatures, and litigants concerning the permissible scope of affirmative action policies. As discussed in Part IV, a more effective—and honest—approach would be to acknowledge that: (1) diversity is an essential part of ensuring inclusion in higher education and the workplace; (2) remedying past discrimination is a compelling state interest; and (3) in limited circumstances race may be a dispositive factor in the admissions or hiring process. The Court’s current framework, although well-intentioned, ignores these realities and tries to quantify the role of race in admissions – a task that is impossible and
Throughout many of the affirmative action legal cases, one of the main arguments from proponents is that it is necessary in order to right the wrongs of past racial discrimination. Some say that affirmative action is justified because even though white applicants may be more qualified, this is only because they did not face the same hardships as their minority counterparts (Rachels, Ethics, 1973). Many argue if we do not integrate disadvantaged minorities into mainstream social institutions, they will continue to suffer the discrimination that has plagued our country for centuries and that this is detrimental to not only the minorities but also society as a whole (Anderson, 2002, 1270–71). However, the debate has recently shifted to the benefits of diversity in the classroom which the Supreme Court has affirmed as being a positive thing
