then when he applies this to looking at abigail fisher's challenge to the university of texas process he really takes down each of her complaints one by one. in many instances her complaints echoed his and so it is a fascinating read. she begins by saying that he says the university of texas failed to precisely define the level of minority enrollments that would actually constitute critical mass. therefore be impossible for the court to assess whether they're not the university of texas has met its goal of achieving critical mass. and justice kennedy says absolutely and not and i will quote from him. he says increasing minority enrollment may be instrumental to the set education benefits but it is not to as the petitioner seems to think can or should be reason deuced appear numbers. since university is prohibited to seeking a prohibited number it cannot be faulted for failing to specify the particular level of minority level that diversity levels will be obtained. so he he slips on his head, the university cannot count students of color and so abigail fisher, your request request for

isyou all know, fisher ii the second round in the supreme court of abigail fisher's challenge to the university of texas' admissions policy. this was a big surprise in terms of the way the court decided this case, especially with justice kennedy writing the majority opinion. there's a lot that can be said about this decision but i think i'd like to talk about it in terms of what it reflects about the ark of justice kennedy's thinking about issues of race conscious admissions. it demonstrates a remarkable in the way he looks at these issues and it does offer insight into how we might anticipate and expect how the court might rule going forward. talking about fisher, we should start talking about anthony kennedy and greater. it frames and understanding of what he did in the fisher case. in grutter, the supreme court upheld the university of michigan's law school race conscious admissions program in 2003. kennedycase, justice lambasted -- he issued a scathing dissent regarding the courts decision. he lambasted the majority on a bunch of grounds. he accused the court of failing to adhere

abigail fisher accuses the university of texas of not needing to consider a because in her view they had already achieved critical mass with the race neutral policies administered. he goes through those and says absolutely not. the record shows that there was not critical mass based on the goals identified by the university. she said consideration of race was not necessary because it only had a limited impact on advancing the university's compelling interests. he said that was contradicted by the record. he also says, "the fact that race consciousness played a role in only a small portion of admission decisions should be a hallmark of narrow tailoring, not evidence of unconstitutionality." again, the fact that this affects a small group is evidence of the constitutionality of the process. lastly, she said there were alternative race neutral means available. justice kennedy takes these down one by one. none of fisher's alternatives were viable, according to the decision. the university should not have had to alter the weight given to things like socioeconomic factors because you do no