|
|
Texas v. Lesage, 528 U.S. 18 (1999)
Contents:
Show Summary
Hide Summary
General SummaryThis case is from a collection containing the full text of over 16,000 Supreme Court cases from 1793 to the present. The body of Supreme Court decisions are, effectively, the final interpretation of the Constitution. Only an amendment to the Constitution can permanently overturn an interpretation and this has happened only four times in American history.
Texas v. Lesage, 528 U.S. 18 (1999)
Texas v. Lesage No. 98-1111 Decided November 29, 1999 528 U.S. 18
PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
Syllabus
Respondent Lesage, an African immigrant of Caucasian descent, was denied admission to a Ph.D. program at the University of Texas, which considered applicants’ race during the review process. He filed suit seeking money damages and injunctive relief, alleging that, by establishing and maintaining a race-conscious admissions process, the school had violated the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause and 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981, 1983, and 2000d. The District Court granted summary judgment for petitioners, who offered evidence that, even if the school’s admissions process had been completely color-blind, Lesage would not have been admitted. The Fifth Circuit reversed.
Held: the Fifth Circuit’s holding that summary judgment was inappropriate on Lesage’s § 1983 damages claim even if petitioners conclusively established that he would have been rejected under a race-neutral policy is inconsistent with this Court’s well established framework for analyzing such claims. Under Mt. Healthy City Bd. of Ed. v. Doyle, 429 U.S. 274, 287, when the government has considered an impermissible criterion in making a decision adverse to the plaintiff, it can nonetheless avoid liability by proving that it would have made the same decision absent the forbidden consideration. It is immaterial that the Court’s previous decisions on this point have typically involved alleged retaliation for protected First Amendment activity, rather than racial discrimination. Of course, a plaintiff challenging an ongoing race-conscious program and seeking forwarding-looking relief need only show "the inability to compete on an equal footing." Northeastern Fla. Chapter, Associated Gen. Contractors of America v. Jacksonville, 508 U.S. 656, 666. But where there is no allegation of an ongoing or imminent constitutional violation to support such a claim, the government’s conclusive demonstration that it would have made the same decision absent the alleged discrimination precludes any liability finding. Whether Lesage’s claims under §§ 1981 and 2000d remain, and whether he has abandoned his claim for injunctive relief,m are matters open on remand.
Certiorari granted; 158 F.3d 213 reversed and remanded.
Contents:
Chicago: U.S. Supreme Court, "Syllabus," Texas v. Lesage, 528 U.S. 18 (1999) in 528 U.S. 18 528 U.S. 19. Original Sources, accessed November 25, 2024, http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=NU5GCDCYG1Z1R13.
MLA: U.S. Supreme Court. "Syllabus." Texas v. Lesage, 528 U.S. 18 (1999), in 528 U.S. 18, page 528 U.S. 19. Original Sources. 25 Nov. 2024. http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=NU5GCDCYG1Z1R13.
Harvard: U.S. Supreme Court, 'Syllabus' in Texas v. Lesage, 528 U.S. 18 (1999). cited in 1999, 528 U.S. 18, pp.528 U.S. 19. Original Sources, retrieved 25 November 2024, from http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=NU5GCDCYG1Z1R13.
|