Case Study Of Abigail Fisher V. University Of Texas

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. Many students attended the university felt unimportant and spoke out loudly about being isolated. During the cross-examination the university argued that African Americans, Hispanic, and Asian students were denied entry for not meeting college admission requirements, not because of race.
In preparing the case both Fisher and the university prosecutors done an

The UT attorney aggressively cross-examination by stated that understand dealing with college rejection letters is normal, but it’s okay to be sad because when one door closes another one opens. In the plaintiff motion, Fisher attorney Rein, presented a close question to help build a convincing argument and provided the court with exclusive facts and evidences to support the oral argument and identifying the relevant issues. Rein use strict scrutiny as a neutral factor of