Equity by Design : Examining Law & Policy for Undocumented Immigrant Students through the pK-20 Pipeline

The purpose of this Equity Brief is to provide some guidance for educators with regard to the challenges around supporting undocumented students in the midst of uncertain times and continued concerns surrounding Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA). Many youth in the DACA Program have made the United States their home and have lived in the country the majority of their lives. Since its inception, DACA has been a source of contention for many, opponents argue that DACA has decreased the educational budget whereas others proponents of DACA focus on the educational opportunities it presents

Employment prospects of international students in the U.S. and Canada: Socio-political implications for colleges and universities

While the increase of the international student population has been a significant issue on a global scale, it is rarely discussed in the context of two border countries in North America – the U.S. and Canada. In addition, attention to skilled migration as a policy preference has increased among governments in an effort to address labor market gaps arising from economic shifts and structural aging. Governments invent a list of desirable characteristics in international students, such as education, age, language, and work experience, that allows them to be able to apply for employment after graduation. Countries like Canada and Australia are able to retain these students after graduation while more restrictive U.S. policies have implications on international student decision-making and on American institutions of higher education. This article will explore the impact of immigration policies on higher education institutions’ efforts in the U.S. and Canada in attracting international students to their campuses as a result of national immigration laws and priorities

Burden's on U! The Impact of the Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin Decision on K–16 Admissions Policies

Using race as a factor in admissions policies was contested in Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin. Although the U.S. Supreme Court firmly held in Grutter v. Bollinger that race can be considered among many factors in admitting students, the recent decision in Fisher has posed many questions and challenges for institutions of higher education. It is clear that the Supreme Court has made it more challenging for institutions to advance institutional diversity. This article examines the ruling in Fisher and how it impacts admissions in K–16 education

Know Your Rights: Achieving Academic Success for Undocumented Students in the P-20 Pipeline

This fact sheet provides information that is accessible to students, families, and education professionals to understand the legal rights of DACAmented and undocumented students

A Colorblind Discourse Analysis of Higher Education Race-Conscious Admissions in a Post-Racial Society

While the United States Supreme Court held in Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin that the University’s admissions plan was constitutional and that race-conscious admissions policies are still permissible, the movement to eliminate the consideration of race in college and university admissions is still going strong in current litigation against the University of North Carolina – Chapel Hill and Harvard University. Many argue that we are living in a “post-racial” society and no longer need race-conscious admissions; how-ever, this Article argues through colorblind discourse that there has been a sustained and continual effort to eliminate the consideration of race. This Article provides an understanding of colorblind discourse, the legal background on race-conscious admissions, it applies colorblind discourse while examining current litigation, and it proposes best-practices for recruiting and retaining diversity on college campuses

Fisher v. University of Texas: The Potential for Social Science Research in Race-Conscious Admissions

Less than ten years after Grutter v. Bollinger and Gratz v. Bollinger, the U.S. Supreme Court has decided to hear Fisher v. University of Texas, another race conscious admissions case in higher education. In Fisher v. University of Texas, Abigail Fisher, a white Texas resident, claimed that she was denied admission to the University of Texas in Austin because of her race. Specifically, she alleges that minority students with less stellar qualifications were admitted instead of her. Affirming the district court’s opinion, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals held in favor of the University. The Fifth Circuit did not find the university’s plan to be an illegal quota or akin to racial balancing. Instead, the court determined that the university followed the Grutter decision and carefully considered race as one of many factors in admitting students. The Fifth Circuit declined to hear the case en banc. After briefly highlighting the equal protection analysis, the outcomes in earlier Supreme Court decisions involving race-conscious admissions, and the 2011 Guidance from the U.S. Department of Education and the U.S. Department of Justice on implementing race-conscious policies in elementary, secondary, and post-secondary education, we examine the amicus briefs filed on behalf of Abigail Fisher and the University of Texas. In analyzing the amicus briefs, particular attention is focused on whether social science research was relied upon. Specifically, the social science research was rated and then discussed in order to highlight the range of research relied upon by both amici

Mutiny Over Strict Scrutiny? Interpreting the Judicial Approach to Race-Conscious Higher Education Admission Policies

During the United States Supreme Court’s 2015-16 term, Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin (hereinafter referred to as Fisher I and Fisher II) was heard for a second time. The main issue in this case centered on the question of whether the University’s implementation of its admissions plan, in conjunction with the state’s Top Ten Percent Law, meets the two-prong strict scrutiny standard of first, being a compelling state interest and second, a narrowly tailored means to meet the stated objective. Under the Top Ten Percent Law high school students who graduate in the top ten percent of their class are eligible for automatic admission to any public college or university in Texas. In its 2013 ruling in Fisher I, the Supreme Court surmised that the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals failed to properly apply the strict scrutiny analysis to the contested plan. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in the first appearance of Fisher I in 2011 and the second in 2014 that the University’s admissions format is constitutionally sound based on a strict scrutiny analysis. Since the application of the doctrinal framework for strict scrutiny is at odds between the high court and the Fifth Circuit, the Supreme Court’s analysis in Fisher II is of great interest. In this article using colorblind discourse as a theoretical framework, we posit why the Supreme Court accepted Fisher I for a second time especially in light of justiciability questions regarding the “troublesome threshold issues relating to standing and mootness,” analyze the Court’s Fisher II oral arguments, and share best practices on what higher education institutions can legally do to continue admitting and retaining people of color