Editing Reverse discrimination (section)

==== Colleges ====

White college applicants who have felt passed over in favor of less-qualified Black students as a result of affirmative action in college admissions have described such programs as "reverse discrimination". Elizabeth Purdy argues that this conception of reverse discrimination came close to overturning affirmative action during the [[Conservatism in the United States|conservative]] resurgence of the 1980s and '90s after being granted legitimacy by the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in ''[[Regents of the University of California v. Bakke]]'', which ruled that Alan Bakke had been discriminated against by the school's admissions program.<ref name="Purdy 2005">{{cite book |last=Purdy |first=Elizabeth |editor1-last=Carlisle |editor1-first=Rodney P. |title=Encyclopedia of Politics: The Left and The Right, Volume 1: The Left |date=2005 |publisher=SAGE Publications |location=Thousand Oaks, Calif. |isbn=978-1-41-290409-4 |page=133 |doi=10.4135/9781412952408.n60 |chapter=Desegregation}}</ref>

In 1996, the [[University of Texas at Austin|University of Texas]] had to defer the use of racial preferences in their college admissions after the [[United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit|US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit]] barred the school from considering race in admitting students. The ruling determined that diversity in education could not justify making race-based distinctions. ''[[Hopwood v. Texas]]'' in 1996 was a lawsuit brought by four white applicants to the Texas Law School who were denied admission even though their [[grade point average]]s were greater than minority applications that were accepted. The four white students also had greater Law School Admission Test scores.<ref name="Menache 1999">{{cite journal |first1=Robert |last1=Menache |first2=Brian H. |last2=Kleiner |title=New Developments in Reverse Discrimination |journal=Equal Opportunities International |year=1999 |volume=18 |issue=2/3/4 |pages=41–42 |issn=0261-0159 |doi=10.1108/02610159910785790}}</ref>

However, in ''[[Grutter v. Bollinger]]'' in 2003, the Supreme Court allowed the University of Michigan Law School to continue to consider race among other relevant diversity factors. The decision was the only legally challenged affirmative-action policy to survive the courts. However, this ruling has led to confusion among universities and lower courts alike regarding the status of affirmative action across the nation.

In 2012, [[Fisher v. University of Texas (2013)|''Fisher v. University of Texas'']] reached the Supreme Court.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=6161900559426345780&q=Abigail+Fisher&hl=en&as_sdt=2,7&as_ylo=2012 |title=Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin, 132 S. Ct. 1536 |publisher=Supreme Court of the United States |date=21 February 2012 |via=Google Scholar |access-date=26 October 2015 |archive-date=14 May 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150514111330/http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=6161900559426345780&q=Abigail+Fisher&hl=en&as_sdt=2,7&as_ylo=2012 |url-status=live }}</ref>  The University of Texas allegedly used race as a factor in denying Abigail Fisher's application, denying her a fair review. The lower courts upheld the program, but the Supreme Court vacated the judgment of the lower courts and sent the case back to the Fifth Circuit for review.