The Optimist (Abilene, Tex.), 69(4), Ed. 1, Tues., Sept. 15, 1981 (newspaper),http://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth99589/).Notable U.S. Supreme Court DecisionsThe first opinion she wrote as a Justice was Mississippi University for Women v. Hogan, a genderdiscriminationcase. 5 Her opinion allows us to examine how Justice O’Connor viewed college admission rules.Mississippi University for Women (“MUW”) was a women’s university that included a nursing school that, like theuniversity of which it was a part, admitted only women under the auspices of “educational affirmative action.” 6In 1979, Joe Hogan applied to enter the nursing school in order to obtain a B.A. to go with the R.N. degreehe already had, but although he was otherwise qualified he was denied admission solely because he was a man.Hogan brought suit claiming that he was denied admission solely on the basis of his gender and that MUW’ssingle-sex admission policy violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.The main focus of Justice O’Connor’s opinion was that, since women already dominated the field of nursing(she supplied statistics, a favorite tool of hers, to prove her point), there was no need for “educational affirmativeaction” for women in the field of nursing. “In limited circumstances a gender-based classification favoring one sex canbe justified if it intentionally and directly assists members of the sex that is disproportionately burdened.” 7 In fact, she5458 U.S. 718 (1982).6Id. at 727. Mississippi University for Women is now a coeducational institution.7Id. at 728 (citing Schlesinger v. Ballard, 419 U.S. 498 [1975]).93
argued, “MUW’s policy of excluding males from admission to the School of Nursing tends to perpetuate the stereotypedview of nursing as an exclusively woman’s job.” 8 It was her position that the addition of men to the student body wouldhelp remove the female stereotype attached to the profession and the accompanying lower wages paid women.In Hogan, she was not examining how many men were to be admitted; that determination had been madeby the Mississippi state legislature when it passed the statute establishing MUW as a women-only university.Hence, there was no need to dissect the state’s policy as it was stated and applied. Rather, the “scrutiny” wason the university’s very reason for existence, i.e. education reserved exclusively for women. O’Connor foundthe school’s discrimination against men unconstitutional: “we conclude that the State has fallen far short ofestablishing the ‘exceedingly persuasive justification’ needed to sustain the gender-based classification.” 9In Grutter v. Bollinger, 10 Justice O’Connor considered the case brought by an applicant to the Universityof Michigan Law School who was denied admission, while other, arguably less academically qualified, but morediverse, applicants were admitted. The law school evaluated applicants under a policy that considered factorsbeyond GPA and LSAT scores in an attempt to obtain a diverse student body who could provide the educationalbenefits of diversity. The “plus” factors that the law school considered were not limited to race and ethnicity, butincluded applicants who had lived or traveled widely abroad, were fluent in several languages, had overcomepersonal adversity and family hardship, had exceptional records of community service, or had successful careers. 11The goal of the diversity admissions program was to admit students who would make a notable contribution to theclass through a particular strength, attainment, or characteristic. 12After considering the operation of the law school’s program in depth, Justice O’Connor found that theschool’s narrowly tailored use of race in admissions furthered the compelling interest of obtaining the educationalbenefits that flow from a diverse student body. 13Justice O’Connor’s Nomination Itself Would Meet the Grutter TestLike the “diverse” student applicants, Sandra Day O’Connor was an affirmative action nominee. President Reagannominated her because he had promised to nominate a woman to the Supreme Court and she was a woman. But howwould she have fared under the criteria set out in Grutter? What did she bring to the Court? What were the “plus” factors?First, she is a woman, a member of a class historically discriminated against (by virtue of their total absence)on the Supreme Court.Second, she is a Republican and had been active in the party for a number of years before her nomination.Third, she graduated third in her law school class, was on the Stanford law review, and was a member ofthe Order of the Coif.Fourth, she had been a classmate and friend of U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice William Rehnquist whilein law school.8Id. at 730.9Id. at 718.10539 U.S. 306 (2003).11Id. at 338.12Id.13Id. at 343.94
- Page 1 and 2:
Journal of theTEXAS SUPREME COURT H
- Page 3 and 4:
News & AnnouncementsU.S. Senator Jo
- Page 5 and 6:
• FellowsMuch of the Society’s
- Page 7 and 8:
I can’t conclude my remarks witho
- Page 9 and 10:
students. An NPR story critical of
- Page 11 and 12:
FELLOWS OF THE SOCIETYHEMPHILL FELL
- Page 13 and 14:
ABOVE: Former Justice Dale Wainwrig
- Page 15 and 16:
ABOVE: Kerry Cammack, former Justic
- Page 17 and 18:
Patty Hagans, Lauren Harris, Chief
- Page 19 and 20:
And while the warriors are absent o
- Page 21 and 22:
Reflections on the Texas Equal Righ
- Page 23 and 24:
No Pawn in a Game of Thrones:Queen
- Page 25 and 26:
In the life she lived, the examples
- Page 27 and 28:
marriages, would be governed by the
- Page 29 and 30:
law firm partnership with his fathe
- Page 31 and 32:
Peter Gray’s personal copy of The
- Page 33 and 34:
Original Case File Cover, “Emelin
- Page 35 and 36:
Bolls’s attorney sent questions t
- Page 37 and 38:
Oran Roberts honoring his life. Add
- Page 39 and 40:
Although no known photograph or des
- Page 41 and 42:
sources, including interviews with
- Page 43 and 44:
Below: Plat of San Felipe de Austin
- Page 45 and 46: Sam Houston had meanwhile become th
- Page 47 and 48: feared that the government might ne
- Page 49 and 50: Contemporary chronicles of what hap
- Page 51 and 52: Captain Lewis reported later that t
- Page 53 and 54: No delicate flower prone to wilt un
- Page 55 and 56: would be well-educated by sendingth
- Page 57 and 58: Hortense S. Ward’s face on the Ha
- Page 59 and 60: and motivation. 22 The Legislature
- Page 61 and 62: As Chief Justice Pope observed, Hor
- Page 63 and 64: Hortense remained active in the Hou
- Page 65 and 66: They Would Not Be Denied:The Texas
- Page 67 and 68: the law and society, unmarried wome
- Page 69 and 70: Letter, C.B. Randell toErminia T. F
- Page 71 and 72: those regarding women’s suffrage,
- Page 73 and 74: arena. Jane Y. McCallum, a successf
- Page 75 and 76: tsl-50022.html#series5) and the Tex
- Page 77 and 78: like her contemporary, Sandra Day O
- Page 79 and 80: in which she held Judge Hughes, my
- Page 81 and 82: state’s highest court, Governor P
- Page 83 and 84: women could cast ballots in this el
- Page 85 and 86: opponents in the race. Her slogan w
- Page 87 and 88: qualifications. In 2002 at the requ
- Page 89 and 90: Those who did practice law experien
- Page 91 and 92: Docket sheet in R.E. Hayes v. Texas
- Page 93 and 94: 1919 and moved to Houston as a sing
- Page 95: In 1950, most law firms would not h
- Page 99 and 100: Preserving the Oral History of Stat
- Page 101 and 102: Linda Hunsaker (left),great grandda
- Page 103 and 104: Participants in the 2015 Women’s
- Page 105 and 106: training programs for law firm asso
- Page 107 and 108: Property Act, Francisco sent the pr
- Page 109 and 110: U.S. Senator John Cornyn Will Keyno
- Page 111 and 112: Society Hosts Second Biennial Sympo
- Page 113 and 114: SCOTX Justices Eva Guzman and Debra
- Page 115 and 116: The Society’s Program “Magna Ca
- Page 117 and 118: Society Debuts YouTube Channel,Post
- Page 119 and 120: Texas Legislature Funds the Texas D
- Page 121 and 122: In addition, the Texas Supreme Cour
- Page 123 and 124: 2015 BA BreakfastBy Dylan O. Drummo
- Page 125 and 126: twenty-eighth state to join the Uni
- Page 127 and 128: Sat., Nov. 7Sat., Nov. 14Sat./Sun.,
- Page 129 and 130: TEXAS SUPREME COURTHISTORICAL SOCIE
- Page 131 and 132: New MembersThe Society has added fo
- Page 133: Membership ApplicationName:The Texa