Monday, May 9, 2011

Popular Sovereignty
The principle in which people have the power over the government. The students involved in the aforementioned cases all felt their rights were being infringed upon and took it upon themselves to take them to court.

Checks and Balances
The President of the United States changed the specifics of the affirmative action policy quite a few times, which changed the laws that the courts had to judge by.

Judicial Review
High court systems could overturn a lower court's ruling on any of the cases.
In 2003, the Supreme Court ruled that “race can be a factor for universities shaping their admissions programs.” However, it cannot be a large factor for the schools’ admissions programs due to the fact that it may lead to unconstitutional policies.

However, in a separate decision, the courts system put the hammer down on a “point system” utilized by a University of Michigan law school, which gave “race less prominence in the admissions decision-making process.” The ultimate vote in the courts was 5-4 for the law school program, and the undergrad program ending in a vote of 6-3. This decision will most likely have a large effect on the majority of private colleges and universities as well as government decision-making and the business world, as all are attempting to boost minority’s enrollment without being unconstitutional.

These two cases from the University of Michigan were the “most significant test of affirmative action to reach the court in a generation. At issue was whether racial preference programs unconstitutionally discriminate against white students” (CNN Justice).

Ricci v. DeStefano

June 29, 2009
In a lawsuit brought against the city of New Haven, 18 plaintiffs—17 white and 1 Hispanic—argued that lieutenant and captain exam results from 2003 were tossed out when it was found out that very few minority firefighters were capable for improvement. The city claimed they threw out the results because they feared liability under a disparate-impact statute for issuing tests that discriminated against minority firefighters. The plaintiffs claimed that they were victims of reverse discrimination under the Civil Rights Act. The Supreme Court decided in favor of the firefighters, saying New Haven's "action in discarding the tests was a violation of" the Civil Rights Act.