This Article Full Text (OnlineFirst PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Google Scholar Articles by Bradbury, M. D. Social Bookmarking                   What's this?

Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. 1: Dubious Prospects for Diversity as a Compelling Governmental Interest

Appalachian State University

^* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: bradburymd{at}appstate.edu.

	Abstract

The Supreme Court applied strict scrutiny to diversification plans for public high school enrollment in Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. 1 (2007). Unlike the diversity plan upheld in Grutter v. Bollinger (2003), where law school applicants were potentially denied a benefit, all students in the Seattle plan were awarded a high school seat but perhaps not in their preferred school. Nevertheless, this plan was struck down by the Court as a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment, on the grounds that it was not sufficiently narrowly tailored. The question of whether diversity can withstand the other aspect of strict scrutiny, serving a compelling government interest, was not as definitively answered, although the prospects appear dim. A reasonable inference from Parents Involved for public human resource management is that race-conscious diversity plans are not likely to receive constitutional cover from the current Court.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?