The recent Supreme Court decision in Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin led to a national discussion regarding the applicability and effectiveness of affirmative action. Brandeis administrators took part in this discussion, noting the influence any change in affirmative action could have on the University and the United States.

On July 2, University President Frederick Lawrence participated in a panel discussion at the National Constitution Center in Philadelphia to examine the significant rulings of the Supreme Court's 2012-2013 term. During the event, Lawrence and other members of the panel discussed Fisher and its implications.

After being rejected from the University of Texas at Austin, plaintiff Abigail Fisher filed a lawsuit asking that the Court declare the university's race-conscious admissions inconsistent with Grutter v. Bollinger, a 2003 case which established that race had an appropriate but limited role in the admissions policies of public universities. Fisher, a Caucasian female, maintained that the university had racially discriminated against her in its admissions process.

Justice Anthony Kennedy delivered the majority opinion, stating Fisher could only challenge "whether the university's decision to use race as an admissions factor 'was made in good faith.'" Due to the fact that the Fifth Circuit failed to apply strict scrutiny as maintained by the Supreme Court majority, the case was vacated and remanded in a 7-1 decision with only Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg dissenting.

"There were those of us who [were] feared [by] the fact that the Court took this case only 10 years after the Grutter decision ... So there was certainly concern that it was agenda-driven and that the agenda might very well be overruling Grutter and overruling [Regents of the University of California v. Bakke]," said Lawrence during the panel discussion.

Lawrence asserted that he has taken comfort in the fact that the Supeme Supreme Court did not overturn Grutter or change the protocol of affirmative action. "I guess in my head I share ... pessimism that affirmative action may be on shaky ground ... But I think we will learn a great deal about this in the coming term and terms ... watching how lower courts continue to work," he said.

Although the case specifically referred to public universities, the controversy over affirmative action could potentially reach to private universities. "The fact that this is a core issue to us as a private university means that it will affect us sort of one level removed," said Lawrence during the panel discussion. "But if the court decides down the road that affirmative action is actually a form of racial discrimination, that would affect us in private universities, as well, so this is something we pay very close attention to."

According to Lawrence, diversity is a core piece of Brandeis. "Going back to when the University was founded in 1948, as a university they would not discriminate and therefore would be open to all comers," he said during the panel.

Senior Vice President for Students and Enrollment Andrew Flagel also acknowledged the University's emphasis on diversity. "In many ways, Brandeis was founded as a response to the exclusionary admission practices of elite institutions," he wrote in an email to the Justice.

According to Flagel, the University admissions process was designed to avoid discrimination against any group. "We undertake a complex, holistic review of all applicants to determine the best fit for Brandeis.  This balances student profile with the talents and backgrounds that make for our highly competitive entering classes," he wrote. "I haven't seen anything in the Supreme Court decisions that are likely to impact that process."

For critics of affirmative action concerned that affirmative action could allow for "unqualified" students to be admitted to universities, Flagel wrote, "Our students are phenomenally successful, persisting through to graduation as well as in placement in graduate schools and careers, and the profile of our entering class is among the highest in the nation.  I don't imagine [those] kinds of concerns ... are an issue for Brandeis."

The strategic plan, a plan endorsed by the Board of Trustees that was designed to provide a framework for decision making for the University, introduced the sentiment from the University that it must continue to increase diversity among its student population, a result considered to be the purpose of affirmative action by its proponents.

According to the strategic plan, as of its release, 21 percent of the University's undergraduates are students of color, 30 percent are first-generation college students and 30 percent come from low-income households.

"Brandeis continues to reach out nationally to increase the diversity of our applicant pool," wrote Flagel in regards to the University's plans to increase diversity as stated in the strategic plan.

According to Lawrence, for schools such as Brandeis, it could be easier to defend programs that would increase diversity. "I think that those of us with smaller universities and smaller undergraduate student bodies it may be somewhat easier to make the cases for why specific decisions had to be made the way they are. In large state universities, the challenge may be very great," he said.

Despite the questions regarding affirmative action and its future following Fisher, diversity remains a key component to the University. "There is no more important aspect of [ensuring] that we protect the vision of the founders to remove any barriers to an elite education for the very best students, regardless of their background," wrote Flagel.
*