Raising the bar on achieving racial diversity in higher education: the United States Supreme Court's decision in Fisher v University of Texas.

Acad Med

Ms. Rosenbaum is Harold and Jane Hirsh Professor, Health Law and Policy, George Washington University School of Public Health and Health Services, Washington, DC. Mr. Teitelbaum is associate professor, George Washington University School of Public Health and Health Services, Washington, DC. Dr. Scott is professor, Emergency Medicine and Health Policy, George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Washington, DC.

Published: December 2013

In Fisher v University of Texas, the U.S. Supreme Court revisited the constitutionality of race-conscious admissions practices aimed at fostering student diversity in university programs. Although it concluded that student diversity remains the type of compelling state interest that justifies consideration of race in admissions, the court nonetheless raised the bar on the use of such practices by requiring universities to prove that no workable race-neutral methods can produce the same result. Whether this standard of proof is one that can be met-and whether challenges will mount against universities that continue to use the holistic methods sanctioned 10 years ago in Grutter v Bollinger-remains to be seen. In this commentary, the authors review the background and history of the Supreme Court's decisions on race as a factor in university admissions decisions and examine the potential effects of Fisher on medical education specifically.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000000022DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

supreme court's
8
fisher university
8
university texas
8
student diversity
8
raising bar
4
bar achieving
4
achieving racial
4
racial diversity
4
diversity higher
4
higher education
4

Similar Publications

Over the past decade, access to and insurance coverage for gender-affirming medical and surgical treatment for transgender (trans) individuals in the U.S. has improved.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Training programs in pulmonary and critical care medicine have greatly expanded in the past decade, yet they do not reflect the racial/ethnic and economic diversity of the United States, which has significant implications for health equity. The lack of representation across medical education is likely to worsen with the recent Supreme Court decision banning affirmative action. The authors review health disparities in pulmonary and critical care medicine, the relationship of the workforce to health equity, and 10 tactics for addressing this urgent public health issue.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Navigating "regulatory fog": Challenges to rigorous abortion research after the Dobbs v. Jackson decision.

Contraception

January 2025

Collaborative for Reproductive Equity, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, 1300 University Avenue, Medical Sciences Center 4245 Madison, WI 53706 USA. Electronic address:

In 2022, the United States' Supreme Court ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization overturned Roe v. Wade and federal protections for abortion.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Importance: In the 2020 Bostock v Clayton County decision, the US Supreme Court extended employment nondiscrimination protection to sexual minority adults. The health impacts of this ruling and similar policies related to sexual orientation-based discrimination are not currently known.

Objective: To estimate changes in mental health following the Bostock decision among sexual minority adults in states that gained employment nondiscrimination protection (intervention states) compared with those in states with protections already in place (control states).

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!