![]() Part IV will define the Court’s strict scrutiny test for evaluating affirmative action admission policies, and will highlight why it is appropriate to use separate tests for challenges to affirmative action programs aimed at achieving diversity in the workplace and those aimed at achieving diversity in education. Part III will provide an analysis of the Grutter and Gratz decisions, with a particular focus on each Court’s discussion of the strict scrutiny test. Part II reviews constitutional challenges to affirmative action policies prior to Grutter and Gratz, and will discuss the split in the circuits that resulted from the Court’s failure to endorse Justice Powell’s definition of a compelling governmental interest in Bakke. This article identifies the new strict scrutiny test and considers the reason for creating a separate definition of strict scrutiny for evaluating affirmative action policies that achieve diversity in the classroom. Post- Bakke challenges more clearly defined the test, requiring state or federal entities defending any race-conscious program to demonstrate that there was a compelling governmental interest in the program, and to establish that the program was narrowly tailored to meet that interest. The Court has since required that a race-conscious program not be upheld under the Constitution unless it passes the “strict scrutiny test,” first articulated by Justice Powell in Regents of the University of California at Davis v. The Court also articulated a “narrowly tailored” test that is arguably more appropriate for evaluating challenges to affirmative action programs aimed at achieving diversity in the classroom than those designed to increase racial equality in the workplace. In reviewing challenges to two affirmative action admissions policies, the Court confirmed that there is a compelling governmental interest in achieving diversity in the classroom. Bollinger confirms that the Court applies a different strict scrutiny test for challenges to affirmative action programs aimed at improving diversity in the classroom than the test it applies to challenges to programs aimed at achieving racial equality in the workplace. Send us feedback about these examples.The United State Supreme Court’s review of affirmative action admissions policies in Grutter v. These examples are programmatically compiled from various online sources to illustrate current usage of the word 'skittish.' Any opinions expressed in the examples do not represent those of Merriam-Webster or its editors. Jeff John Roberts, Fortune Crypto, 9 Mar. 2023 Maier and Banhardt predict that Mauve will help change that by bringing in sophisticated institutional investors that are eager to engage with DeFi but are currently skittish about doing so owing to the lack of a robust compliance scheme. 2023 To entice potential customers who might be skittish about buying an EV, the brand is offering a new benefit called Lexus Reserve. 2022 Some guys might want to jump right back into their PR-level of training immediately others, like you, Getting Back to Normal, might be skittish about going even close to all-out again. 2021 The Érard piano was being particularly skittish. Washington Post, 8 June 2022 Arguably that's a small amount compared to the $3.5 trillion in emergency aid disbursed since COVID lockdowns began in March 2020 - and an acceptable drawback for getting needed money to recipients in a hurry - but such headlines tend to make politicians skittish. Sam Walters, Discover Magazine, 22 June 2022 The Delaney was nervy and skittish. 2022 Some are slow, and some are skittish. Hypernyms ('scrutiny' is a kind of. Recent Examples on the Web What the movie does to humanize both these women - and their skittish, often terrified witnesses - feels more fully realized than the procedural bits, which often tend to come off like a broad discourse on How Journalism Works.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |