SCOUS 对AA裁决的直接意义:

SCOUS 对AA裁决的直接意义:

 

SCOUS的裁决，是针对联邦上诉法庭裁决的判断。而上诉法庭是接了原告对联邦地区法庭裁决的申诉。那么这个案子判了以后，对哈佛的影响是什么？

 

这个要把最开始原告提出的告案找来看:

 

原告的要求:

 

1。要求法庭宣布哈佛违反人权法。

 

2。要求法庭宣布在教育问题上任何以种族为判据都是违反人权法。

 

3。永远禁止哈佛以种族因素决定本科生的录取。

 

4。永远禁止哈佛在录取过程中的人员知道被录取人的种族身分。

 

5。哈佛需要支付本案法律费用。

 

6。任何除上述之外的法庭认为正当的裁决。

 

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.