Abortion in Iowa: State Supreme Court hears arguments on restrictive abortion ban

1. Thanks @We Are Iowa Local 5 News for posting this video about affirmative action / supreme court. Here are the viewpoints expressed by Supreme Court justices regarding affirmative action.

   1. The discussion revolves around a lawsuit by Students for Fair Admissions (SFFA) against Harvard College and the University of North Carolina (UNC). SFFA challenged these institutions' admissions policies, arguing they unfairly used race as a consideration, potentially conflicting with the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

   2. SFFA's position was that race-based considerations in admissions might violate the principle of equal treatment under the Equal Protection Clause.

   3. The Court scrutinized the admissions processes at Harvard and UNC, applying a standard of strict scrutiny to assess whether these policies were adequately justified and had a definitive termination point.

   4. Ultimately, the Court concluded that the admissions practices at Harvard and UNC did not align with certain legal standards, questioning the manner in which race was factored into admissions decisions.

   5. Nonetheless, the Court acknowledged that the broader impact of race on an applicant’s life experiences can be a relevant consideration for universities.

   6. The final decision supported SFFA's view, suggesting that Harvard and UNC modify their admissions processes to ensure equitable treatment of all applicants, irrespective of race.

   *The Equal Protection Clause is a part of the Fourteenth Amendment that says that every person should be treated equally by the law, no matter their race, color, or nationality.
   *Strict scrutiny is a way for the courts to look at laws to see if they are fair and necessary. If a law or policy is found to be unfair or unnecessary, it may not pass strict scrutiny and could be considered unconstitutional.

Comments are closed.