The Supreme Court ruled on Monday on Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin, a case concerning affirmative action. Times reporters and editors are analyzing the decision and its implications, as well as the public’s reaction to it.
The Supreme Court issued a ruling on Monday in Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin, a case concerning affirmative action.
From SCOTUSblog:
The opinion by Kennedy. The Fifth Circuit is vacated and remanded. The holding is because the Fifth Circuit did not hold the university to the demanding burden of strict scrutiny articulated in Grutter and Bakke, its decision affiming the district court’s grant of summary judgment was incorrect.
There is one dissent. It is 7-1. Ginsburg dissents alone. There ! are separate concurring opinions by Scalia and Thomas. Kagan was recused.
â€" The New York Times
We realize that people will be eager to know what the ruling means as soon as it comes out (and you can read the decision yourself when it is posted on the court’s Web site). But we also want to point out that the immediate descriptions of any ruling may not be very meaningful.
For one thing, a ruling could be complicated, as were last year’s health care ruling and the 2000 Bush v. Gore ruling, and not amenable to instant summarizing. The court cold even announce one portion of a decision â€" especially on same-sex marriage, given the two different cases â€" before it releases another portion.
Dozens of Times journalists, in Washington, New York and around the country, are covering the ruling and the reaction to it by the public and those affected by it. At the center of the coverage is Adam Liptak, the Supreme Court reporter (and a lawyer) of The Times, who will be in court to hear the ruling.
We plan to explain the ruling the moment we feel comfortable with its basic meaning â€" which could be almost immediately. We promise not to bombard you with guesswork or unintelligible legal technicalities. The Times will also run blog posts from the legal experts at SCOTUSblog on our own site, as well as ask other outside experts to help readers understand the decision. Once the fundamentals of the ruling are clear, Times reporters and editors will be analyzing it in real time, on our live blog dedicated to the ruling and on stories appea! ring acro! ss our digital platforms. We will also post updates to Twitter on @thecaucus and @nytimes, and post selected reactions from readers.
We expect to have Mr. Liptak’s initial story about any ruling by late morning or shortly after noon, not long after the court’s session has ended. Whatever happens Thursday, we also expect at least one major ruling to come next week.
Thanks for being with us.
â€" The New York Times
