平权行动法学中经验推导的强制性国家利益

IF 0.7 4区 社会学 Q2 LAW
Meera E. Deo
{"title":"平权行动法学中经验推导的强制性国家利益","authors":"Meera E. Deo","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2315787","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In the 2013-14 term, the U.S. Supreme Court will consider the legality of a Michigan Constitutional amendment banning affirmative action. Traditionally, educational diversity has been the only compelling state interest that satisfies strict scrutiny in affirmative action challenges. This Article provides additional support for the interest of educational diversity, and proposes three additional compelling state interests for courts to consider. Support for these compelling state interests comes directly from detailed quantitative and qualitative analyses of empirical data collected from Michigan Law students, relating to their preferences for diversity, perceptions of campus climate, and professional aspirations. These findings indicate that educational diversity should remain a compelling state interest, and that courts should also consider the importance of (1) avoiding racial isolation, (2) promoting service to underserved communities, and (3) facilitating diversity in American leadership.","PeriodicalId":46736,"journal":{"name":"Hastings Law Journal","volume":"65 1","pages":"661"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2014-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2139/SSRN.2315787","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Empirically Derived Compelling State Interests in Affirmative Action Jurisprudence\",\"authors\":\"Meera E. Deo\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/SSRN.2315787\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In the 2013-14 term, the U.S. Supreme Court will consider the legality of a Michigan Constitutional amendment banning affirmative action. Traditionally, educational diversity has been the only compelling state interest that satisfies strict scrutiny in affirmative action challenges. This Article provides additional support for the interest of educational diversity, and proposes three additional compelling state interests for courts to consider. Support for these compelling state interests comes directly from detailed quantitative and qualitative analyses of empirical data collected from Michigan Law students, relating to their preferences for diversity, perceptions of campus climate, and professional aspirations. These findings indicate that educational diversity should remain a compelling state interest, and that courts should also consider the importance of (1) avoiding racial isolation, (2) promoting service to underserved communities, and (3) facilitating diversity in American leadership.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46736,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Hastings Law Journal\",\"volume\":\"65 1\",\"pages\":\"661\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2014-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2139/SSRN.2315787\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Hastings Law Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2315787\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hastings Law Journal","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2315787","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

在2013- 2014年任期内,美国最高法院将审议禁止平权行动的密歇根州宪法修正案的合法性。传统上,教育多样性一直是平权法案挑战中唯一能满足严格审查的引人注目的国家利益。本文为教育多样性的利益提供了额外的支持,并提出了法院考虑的另外三个令人信服的国家利益。对这些引人注目的国家利益的支持直接来自对密歇根法学院学生收集的经验数据的详细定量和定性分析,这些数据与他们对多样性的偏好、对校园气候的看法和职业抱负有关。这些发现表明,教育多样性仍应是一个引人注目的国家利益,法院也应考虑以下几点的重要性:(1)避免种族隔离,(2)促进对服务不足社区的服务,以及(3)促进美国领导层的多样性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Empirically Derived Compelling State Interests in Affirmative Action Jurisprudence
In the 2013-14 term, the U.S. Supreme Court will consider the legality of a Michigan Constitutional amendment banning affirmative action. Traditionally, educational diversity has been the only compelling state interest that satisfies strict scrutiny in affirmative action challenges. This Article provides additional support for the interest of educational diversity, and proposes three additional compelling state interests for courts to consider. Support for these compelling state interests comes directly from detailed quantitative and qualitative analyses of empirical data collected from Michigan Law students, relating to their preferences for diversity, perceptions of campus climate, and professional aspirations. These findings indicate that educational diversity should remain a compelling state interest, and that courts should also consider the importance of (1) avoiding racial isolation, (2) promoting service to underserved communities, and (3) facilitating diversity in American leadership.
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
期刊介绍: Hastings College of the Law was founded in 1878 as the first law department of the University of California, and today is one of the top-rated law schools in the United States. Its alumni span the globe and are among the most respected lawyers, judges and business leaders today. Hastings was founded in 1878 as the first law department of the University of California and is one of the most exciting and vibrant legal education centers in the nation. Our faculty are nationally renowned as both teachers and scholars.
×
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