SC Has Not Promoted Equality

Question 1

Affirmative action , immigration, voting rights

Question 2

affirmative action not promoted equality

Answer 2

• justices see AA as contributor to discrimination itself
• 6-3 decision (Gratz) struck down points based system from Michigan uni that awarded automatic bonus to minority applicants
• con bias, believe this is discrimination against white people
• minimises hard work of minority applicants do not need 20+ points boost
  -(meredith v jefferson) ruled assigning students to public schools based on rate was unconstitutional

Question 3

do promote racial equality through AA as SC have ruled race can still be considered a factor

Answer 3

• (Grutter) in line with constit took an individual approach when considering racial profile as it also considered grades and race
• (Fisher v texas) upheld programme, recognised the benefits of diversity to the uni

Question 4

SC not promote, rulings have infringed upon equal treatment of migrants

Answer 4

• (Trump v Hawaii) restrict migration ban from maj muslim counties, has tried to reinstate this in June 2025
• (arizona v US) states local law enforcement was unconstitutional as it wished to enforce federal immigration laws, but court still allowed state to keep some laws including ability for law enforcement to investigate a persons immigration status

Question 5

Sc does promote immigration rights

Answer 5

• takes active judicial stance
• (Arizona v Us) court did strike down 2 provisions to protect migrants
• (dept for homeland sec V uni of cali) court blocked trump from repealing DACA
• (Biden v texas) court ruled in favour of terminating the “remain in mexico” policy that required asylum seekers to remain in mexico while their claims were processed

Question 6

sc doesn’t uphold voting rights

Answer 6

-(shelby v holder) resulted in 6 states including texas ID laws
- (husted v randolph) ruled voter caging was constitutional, affected black american voters who had not voted in a while and had now been taken off register

Question 7

does uphold voting rights

Answer 7

• despite shelby v holder, court emphasised the importance of protecting minority rights and a need for on going vigilance
• (allen v milligan) courts stated alabama’s districts were in violation of the VRA 1965, maj min district that had been expected had not been made to underrep black population