Which statement best describes Fisher v. UT Austin regarding diversity policies?

• A. It upheld a narrowly tailored race-conscious admissions program at the University of Texas at Austin
• B. It banned race-conscious admissions nationwide
• C. It held that race could be the sole factor in admissions
• D. It declared all affirmative action programs unconstitutional

Answer: (A)

Race-conscious admissions policies in higher education are allowed if they are narrowly tailored to achieve the compelling interest of educational diversity. In Fisher v. UT Austin, the Supreme Court reviewed UT Austin’s holistic admissions plan that considered race as one factor among many. The Court ultimately held that this approach satisfied strict scrutiny and was narrowly tailored to promote a diverse student body, thus upholding the policy. The decision illustrates that diversity can be a legitimate goal, but any use of race must be carefully designed to avoid quotas, rely on individualized review, and remain subject to ongoing evaluation. It’s not a blanket ban on race-conscious admissions, it doesn’t permit race to be the sole determinant, and it doesn’t declare all affirmative action programs unconstitutional.