WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Monday added a new affirmative action case to its docket even as it is considering a major challenge to the University of Texas’s race-conscious admissions program.
The new case, Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action, No. 12-682, concerns a voter initiative in Michigan that banned racial preferences in admissions to the state’s public universities. In July, the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, in Cincinnati, ruled that the initiative, which amended the state’s Constitution, violated the federal Constitution’s equal protection clause.
The Texas case, Fisher v. University of Texas, No. 11-345, concerns whether that state is allowed to use affirmative action. The new case, in the words of a dissenting judge, asks whether a state denies equal treatment by mandating it.
The appeals court decision was decided by an 8-to-7 vote. The eight judges in the majority were all nominated by Democratic presidents. All of the seven judges in dissent were nominated by Republican presidents. (There was a wrinkle: Judge Helene N. White, who was in the majority, was initially nominated by President Bill Clinton and was later renominated by President George W. Bush as part of a compromise involving several nominations.)
The new case will be considered in the term that starts in October. A decision in the Texas case is expected shortly.
Justice Elena Kagan recused herself from the new case, as she had from the earlier one, apparently because she worked on them as United States solicitor general.
The new case, Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action, No. 12-682, concerns a voter initiative in Michigan that banned racial preferences in admissions to the state’s public universities. In July, the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, in Cincinnati, ruled that the initiative, which amended the state’s Constitution, violated the federal Constitution’s equal protection clause.
The Texas case, Fisher v. University of Texas, No. 11-345, concerns whether that state is allowed to use affirmative action. The new case, in the words of a dissenting judge, asks whether a state denies equal treatment by mandating it.
The appeals court decision was decided by an 8-to-7 vote. The eight judges in the majority were all nominated by Democratic presidents. All of the seven judges in dissent were nominated by Republican presidents. (There was a wrinkle: Judge Helene N. White, who was in the majority, was initially nominated by President Bill Clinton and was later renominated by President George W. Bush as part of a compromise involving several nominations.)
The new case will be considered in the term that starts in October. A decision in the Texas case is expected shortly.
Justice Elena Kagan recused herself from the new case, as she had from the earlier one, apparently because she worked on them as United States solicitor general.