Description
When Abigail Fisher was denied admission to the University of Texas, she initially sued in the District Court for the Western District of Texas, requiring Judge Sam Sparks to interpret the meaning of the earlier 2003 Grutter v. Bollinger Supreme Court decision allowing affirmative action in higher education. “I’ve read it till I’m blue in the face,” Judge Sparks said in an initial hearing in Ms. Fisher’s lawsuit. But the meaning of the central concept in the decision — “this esoteric critical mass of diversity of students,” he called it — kept evading him.
Although the specific meaning of “critical mass” has indeed proven to be somewhat elusive, when universities look to enroll a critical mass of underrepresented minority students, they do seek to meet certain goals related to First Amendment academic freedoms. What are some of these goals?
What’s the difference between critical mass and a quota or numerical target, and more importantly, how does or should an educational institution know when it has reached a critical mass of minority admissions? Among others, you may wish to make some reference to the educational benefits, and to the broader civic and societal benefits, that diversity is designed to produce.
Relatedly, in Grutter, the Court suggested that in 25 years (or by 2028) the use of racial preferences in university admissions would no longer be necessary to further the educational interest in diversity. In your opinion, has this point already been reached? Why or why not?