Personal tools
You are here: Home Legal Developments Court Decisions Court Decisions

Court Decisions

Policy Briefing Resources Related to Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action
This collection of legal documents, analysis, and media coverage contextualizes the court case and the CRP's work to defend diversity in higher education.
Page Resources Related to Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin
This case reexamines the Supreme Court’s decisions interpreting the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, including Grutter v. Bollinger, with regards to University of Texas at Austin’s use of race in undergraduate admissions decisions.
Page Horne v. Flores: Statement by CRP Co-Director on Why the Protective Order Does Not Provide Enough Protection to Researchers and Schools
A short statement from CRP Co-director Gary Orfield about the risks posed by the Court's failure to protect the names of schools that participated in confidential research
Page Resources Related to Grutter v. Bollinger & Gratz v. Bollinger
Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 306 and Gratz v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 244 , were a linked pair ofcases in which the United States Supreme Court upheld the affirmative action admissions policies of the University of Michigan Law School and the University's undergraduate division respectively
Page Resources on Major Court Decisions
THE CRP maintains legal briefs, memos, policy papers, and research related to many major legal decisions involving education policy and civil rights.
Policy Briefing CRP Resources Related to Horne v. Flores
Resources on the court decision, including research and legal documents.
Policy Briefing Horne v. Flores: Statement of CRP Directors About Research Integrity
The attempt of Arizona officials to silence CRP researchers threatens the integrity of the research and legal processes.
Research Item School Integration Efforts Three Years After "Parents Involved"
We know more than ever about the importance of preventing racially segregated schools and the benefits that students—and society—receive from diverse schools. In fact, the Supreme Court, in its 2007 decision, acknowledged this evidence as “compelling” reasons for districts to adopt policies to further integration.
Page Horne v. Flores: Statement on the Decision of the U.S. Supreme Court
A short statement from CRP Co-directors about the impact of the Flores decision.
Policy Briefing PICS One Year Later: Reflections on the Anniversary of the Supreme Court’s Voluntary Integration Decision
Looking beyond the benefits associated with racially diverse learning opportunities, the relentless inequalities accompanying segregated school environments also underscore the urgent need for policies that promote racial integration. Although not true for all schools, segregated schools tend to have fewer highly qualified and experienced teachers, coupled with high rates of administrative and teacher turnover. Teachers wield huge influence over the educational process, making the inexperience and instability of many teachers in segregated minority schools particularly damaging for students.
Policy Briefing McFarland v. Jefferson County Public Schools & Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. 1 (PICS): Resources On U.S. Supreme Court Voluntary School Desegregation Rulings
The Supreme Court has issued its first major decision on school desegregation in twelve years — McFarland v. Jefferson County Public Schools & Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. 1 — a decision affirming the goal of integrated education as a compelling interest but rejecting the means many school districts use to maintain some integration in a rapidly resegregating society.
Page PICS: Joint Civil Rights Centers Statement
Joint Statement of Nine University-Based Civil Rights Centers on Today's Supreme Court Rulings on Voluntary School Desegregation (McFarland v. Jefferson County Public Schools & Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. 1)
Policy Briefing PICS: Cita en Espanol
Patricia Gándara, Ph.D., Co-Director of the Civil Rights Project/Proyecto Derechos Civiles, responds to the Supreme Court's decision in McFarland v. Jefferson County Public Schools & Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. 1. (In Spanish)
Policy Briefing PICS: The educational implications of linguistic isolation and segregation of Latino English Language Learners (ELLs)
M. Beatriz Arias, Ph.D. of Mary Lou Fulton Collage of Education; Arizona State University responds to the Supreme Court's decision about voluntary school integration. If Latino ELLs are to receive constitutionally guaranteed access to an opportunity to learn English, greater focus must be achieved in identifying and implementing best practices and beneficial educational contexts most conducive for teaching English Language Learners.
Research Item PICS: Brief of 553 Social Scientists on School Desegregation Submitted to US Supreme Court
A social science statement has been submitted to the United States Supreme Court with the signatures of 553 social scientists and researchers, urging the Court to permit the continuation of voluntary race-conscious student assignment plans in American public schools.
Page Grutter v. Bollinger & Gratz v. Bollinger: Statement Analyzing the Implications of Supreme Court's Decisions for Higher Education
America’s colleges and universities were big winners in Monday’s Supreme Court decisions, and now have the opportunity to pursue appropriate measures that take advantage of those victories. The rulings, which recognize the educational benefits of diversity and validate reasonable means by which to achieve that diversity, reaffirm support for affirmative action and endorse university rights to consider the full range of qualities that promising students bring to the table.
Page Grutter v. Bollinger: Joint Statement of Constitutional Law Scholars
Affirmative action in higher education is alive and well. In today’s decisions involving the University of Michigan’s race-conscious affirmative action policies, the U.S. Supreme Court has issued a ringing endorsement of the value of diversity in preparing students for the challenges of American life. As the Court stated in Grutter v. Bollinger: “Effective participation by members of all racial and ethnic groups in the civic life of our Nation is essential if the dream of one Nation, indivisible, is to be realized.” The Court has also provided a clear statement about the appropriate use of race in admissions, holding that the individualized consideration of race must be the hallmark of a carefully designed admissions policy that promotes educational diversity.
Policy Briefing Comfort ex rel. Neumyer v. Lynn School Committee: Voluntary Desegregation Plan Using Race As A Factor
This page presents the findings of several social scientists about the Lynn, Massachusetts school district, its efforts to address students' educational needs, and the decision of the Federal District Court in the case of Comfort ex rel. Neumyer v. Lynn School Committee upholding the districts' efforts.
Page Grutter v. Bollinger & Gratz v. Bollinger: University of Michigan's Race-Conscious Admissions Policies Challenged
In the spring of 2003, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments in two cases that will profoundly impact the future of affirmative action in higher education. The lawsuits against the University of Michigan’s Law School (Grutter v. Bollinger) and the undergraduate College of Literature, Science, and the Arts (Gratz v. Bollinger), both challenge policies that consider race/ethnicity as one factor among many in their admissions decisions. The decisions handed down in these cases, to be heard concurrently, will affect access to colleges and universities for minority students for years to come.
Document Actions

Copyright © 2010 UC Regents