holding that "consideration of race or ethnicity by the [University of Texas] law school for the purposes of achieving a diverse student body is not a compelling interest under the Fourteenth Amendment."
Summary of this case from Eisenberg v. Montgomery County Public SchoolsNo. 95-1012.
July 1, 1996.
C.A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 66 F. 3d 523.
holding that "consideration of race or ethnicity by the [University of Texas] law school for the purposes of achieving a diverse student body is not a compelling interest under the Fourteenth Amendment."
Summary of this case from Eisenberg v. Montgomery County Public Schoolsfinding that the state's interest in diversity at a law school was not compelling and declaring that school's admissions policy, which employed racial classifications, unconstitutional
Summary of this case from Wessmann by Wessmann v. Boston Sch. Comm.dismissing state law claims that arguably constituted unfair labor practice because deciding those claims would have required determination of whether state law relied upon was consistent with substantive provisions of federal law and fashioning of remedy, both of which are exclusive responsibilities of National Labor Relations Board
Summary of this case from Barbieri v. United Technologies Corp.Full title:CALDWELL v. AMERICAN BASKETBALL ASSN., INC., ET AL
Court:U.S.
Date published: Jul 1, 1996
Lakie v. SmithKline Beecham, 965 F. Supp. 49, 54 (D.D.C. 1997) ("The fact that the PMA process requires…
Lesage v. State of TexasFrancois Daniel Lesage applied to enroll in a doctoral program in counseling psychology at The University of…