寻求基本公平和平等保护:美国最高法院在塑造美国民主中的作用

Ellen V. Rubin, Keith P. Baker, Youjung Song, J. Edward Kellough
{"title":"寻求基本公平和平等保护:美国最高法院在塑造美国民主中的作用","authors":"Ellen V. Rubin, Keith P. Baker, Youjung Song, J. Edward Kellough","doi":"10.1177/02750740241242057","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In July 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on two cases: Students for Fair Admissions vs. the University of North Carolina and Students for Fair Admissions v. President and Fellows of Harvard College, effectively prohibiting the use of race as one of many factors in college or university admissions decisions. To explore these two cases, we conducted a content analysis of the legal briefs, the final court ruling, concurrences, and dissents. In its ruling, the Court did not overturn precedents upholding affirmative action, but the majority interpreted those prior cases in such a way that makes it impossible to justify the use of race in college admissions. Although these cases are from the context of higher education, the ruling highlights the fragility of affirmative action generally and may challenge the legal and regulatory structure that underpins many other important civil rights issues.","PeriodicalId":22370,"journal":{"name":"The American Review of Public Administration","volume":"25 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"In Search of Fundamental Fairness and Equal Protection: The Role of the U.S. Supreme Court in Shaping American Democracy\",\"authors\":\"Ellen V. Rubin, Keith P. Baker, Youjung Song, J. Edward Kellough\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/02750740241242057\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In July 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on two cases: Students for Fair Admissions vs. the University of North Carolina and Students for Fair Admissions v. President and Fellows of Harvard College, effectively prohibiting the use of race as one of many factors in college or university admissions decisions. To explore these two cases, we conducted a content analysis of the legal briefs, the final court ruling, concurrences, and dissents. In its ruling, the Court did not overturn precedents upholding affirmative action, but the majority interpreted those prior cases in such a way that makes it impossible to justify the use of race in college admissions. Although these cases are from the context of higher education, the ruling highlights the fragility of affirmative action generally and may challenge the legal and regulatory structure that underpins many other important civil rights issues.\",\"PeriodicalId\":22370,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The American Review of Public Administration\",\"volume\":\"25 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The American Review of Public Administration\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/02750740241242057\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The American Review of Public Administration","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/02750740241242057","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

2023 年 7 月,美国最高法院对两起案件做出裁决:学生争取公平入学诉北卡罗来纳大学案》和《学生争取公平入学诉哈佛大学校长和研究员案》,有效地禁止了在大学录取决定中将种族作为众多因素之一。为了探讨这两起案件,我们对法律简报、法院最终裁决、赞同意见和反对意见进行了内容分析。在裁决中,法院并没有推翻支持平权法案的先例,但多数人对这些先例的解释使得在大学招生中使用种族因素变得不可能合理。虽然这些案件都是高等教育领域的案件,但这一裁决凸显了平权法案在总体上的脆弱性,并可能对支撑许多其他重要民权问题的法律和监管结构提出挑战。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
In Search of Fundamental Fairness and Equal Protection: The Role of the U.S. Supreme Court in Shaping American Democracy
In July 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on two cases: Students for Fair Admissions vs. the University of North Carolina and Students for Fair Admissions v. President and Fellows of Harvard College, effectively prohibiting the use of race as one of many factors in college or university admissions decisions. To explore these two cases, we conducted a content analysis of the legal briefs, the final court ruling, concurrences, and dissents. In its ruling, the Court did not overturn precedents upholding affirmative action, but the majority interpreted those prior cases in such a way that makes it impossible to justify the use of race in college admissions. Although these cases are from the context of higher education, the ruling highlights the fragility of affirmative action generally and may challenge the legal and regulatory structure that underpins many other important civil rights issues.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信