Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin/Dissent Thomas

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Court Documents
Case Syllabus
Opinion of the Court
Dissenting Opinions
Thomas
Alito

Cite as: 579 U. S. ____ (2016)
1

THOMAS, J., dissenting

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES


No. 14–981


ABIGAIL NOEL FISHER, PETITIONER v. UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN, ET AL.

ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

[June 23, 2016]

JUSTICE THOMAS, dissenting.

I join JUSTICE ALITO's dissent. As JUSTICE ALITO explains, the Court's decision today is irreconcilable with strict scrutiny, rests on pernicious assumptions about race, and departs from many of our precedents.

I write separately to reaffirm that "a State's use of race in higher education admissions decisions is categorically prohibited by the Equal Protection Clause." Fisher v. University of Tex. at Austin, 570 U. S. ___, ___ (2013) (THOMAS, J., concurring) (slip op., at 1). "The Constitution abhors classifications based on race because every time the government places citizens on racial registers and makes race relevant to the provision of burdens or benefits, it demeans us all." Id., at ___ (slip op., at 2) (internal quotation marks omitted). That constitutional imperative does not change in the face of a "faddish theor[y]" that racial discrimination may produce "educational benefits." Id., at ___, ___ (slip op., at 5, 13). The Court was wrong to hold otherwise in Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 U. S. 306, 343 (2003). I would overrule Grutter and reverse the Fifth Circuit's judgment.