No. 09-50822 Before KING, HIGGINBOTHAM, and GARZA, Circuit Judges. PATRICK E. HIGGINBOTHAM, Circuit Judge: Abigail Fisher brought this action against the University of Texas at Austin,
alleging that the University’s race-conscious admissions program violated the Fourteenth Amendment. The district court granted summary judgment to UT Austin and we affirmed. The Supreme Court vacated and remanded, holding that this Court and the district court reviewed UT Austin’s means to the end of a diverse student body with undue deference; that we must give a more exacting scrutiny to UT Austin’s efforts to achieve diversity. With the benefit of additional briefing, oral argument, and the ordered exacting scrutiny, we affirm the district court’s grant of summary judgment.
Fisher applied to UT Austin for admission to the entering class of fall 2008.
Although a Texas resident, she did not graduate in the top ten percent of her class. She therefore did not qualify for automatic admission under the Top Ten Percent Plan, which that year took 81% of the seats available for Texas residents.
Instead, she was considered under the holistic review program,
Along with Fisher, Rachel Michalewicz was originally a plaintiff against UT Austin; Michalewicz is no longer a party to this action.
Defs.’ Cross-Mot. Summ. J., Ex. Tab 7 to App., Ishop Aff. at ¶ 2,
Fisher v. Univ. of Tex. at Austin
, 645 F. Supp. 2d 587 (W.D. Tex. 2009) (No. 08-263), ECF No. 96 [hereinafter Ishop Aff.].
Office of Admissions, Univ. of Tex. at Austin,
Implementation and Results of the Texas Automatic Admissions Law (HB 588) at the University of Texas at Austin: Demographic Analysis of Entering Freshmen Fall 2008 and Academic Performance of Top 10% and Non-Top 10% Students Academic Years 2003–2007 (Report 11)
, at 7 tbl.1a (Oct. 28, 2008) [hereinafter
2008 Top Ten Percent Report
], Defs.’ Cross-Mot. Summ. J., Ex. Tab 8 to App., Lavergne Aff., Ex. C,
, 645 F. Supp. 2d 587 (No. 08-263), ECF No. 96,
Ishop Aff. ¶ 16, ECF No. 96. Additionally, Fisher did not apply for any academic programs with special application processes, such as the Plan II Honors program or a Fine Arts program.
Case: 09-50822 Document: 00512699085 Page: 2 Date Filed: 07/15/2014