Answer:
Explanation:
Issue: Can an institution of higher learning use race as a factor when making admissions decisions?
Result: The Court held that universities may use race as part of an admissions process so long as "fixed quotas" are not used. The Court determined that the specific system in place at the University of California Medical School was "unnecessary" to achieve the goal of creating a diverse student body and was merely a "fixed quota" and therefore, was unconstitutional.
Importance: The decision started a line of cases in which the Court upheld affirmative action programs. In 2003, such academic affirmative action programs were again directly challenged in Gratz v. Bollinger and Grutter v. Bollinger. In these cases, the Court clarified that admission programs that include race as a factor can pass constitutional muster so long as the policy is narrowly tailored and does not create an automatic preference based on race. The Court asserted that a system that created an automatic race-based preference would in fact violate the Equal Protection Clause.
Answer:
It's important to understand and fight horizontal oppression because:
<u>A vulnerable group mustn't attack between himself, they must look for equal opportunities and a better life level, the reason why everyone must stop this type of oppression</u>.
Explanation:
The horizontal oppression is the action where members from the same vulnerable group attack other members by reasons like different thoughts, conflicts of interests, or prejudices. How this behavior doesn't benefit the people in that group, in change, further affects them, the best action, in that case, is to stop immediately this action and make the aggressor see his mistake, <em>an example can see where an afro-descendant harass another member of this population because be weak</em>.
True because of decreased human interaction
ballot access, campaign finance rules, and voter perception
