SCOUS 對AA裁決的直接意義:

SCOUS 對AA裁決的直接意義:

 

SCOUS的裁決，是針對聯邦上訴法庭裁決的判斷。而上訴法庭是接了原告對聯邦地區法庭裁決的申訴。那麽這個案子判了以後，對哈佛的影響是什麽？

 

這個要把最開始原告提出的告案找來看:

 

原告的要求:

 

1。要求法庭宣布哈佛違反人權法。

 

2。要求法庭宣布在教育問題上任何以種族為判據都是違反人權法。

 

3。永遠禁止哈佛以種族因素決定本科生的錄取。

 

4。永遠禁止哈佛在錄取過程中的人員知道被錄取人的種族身分。

 

5。哈佛需要支付本案法律費用。

 

6。任何除上述之外的法庭認為正當的裁決。

 

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Students for Fair Admissions, Inc., prays for the

following relief as to all counts:

 (a) A declaratory judgment, pursuant to the Declaratory Judgment Act, 28

U.S.C. § 2201, from the Court that Harvard’s admissions policies and procedures violate

Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000d et seq.;

(b) A declaratory judgment, pursuant to the Declaratory Judgment Act, 28

U.S.C. § 2201, from the Court that any use of race or ethnicity in the educational setting

violates the Fourteenth Amendment and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42

U.S.C. § 2000d et seq.;

(c) A permanent injunction prohibiting Harvard from using race as a factor in

future undergraduate admissions decisions;

(d) A permanent injunction requiring Harvard to conduct all admissions in a

manner that does not permit those engaged in the decisional process to be aware of or

learn the race or ethnicity of any applicant for admission;

(e) Attorneys’ fees and costs pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1988 and any other

applicable legal authority; and

(f) All other relief this Court finds appropriate and just.