族裔可繼續成爲美大學招生考慮因素

WASHingTON — The Supreme Court on Thursday rejected a challenge to a race-conscious admissions program at the University of Texas at Austin, handing supporters of affirmative action a major victory.

華盛頓——本週四，得克薩斯大學奧斯汀分校(University of Texas at Austin)一個具有種族意識的招生計劃遭受的挑戰被最高法院駁回，平權行動的支持者們獲得了重大勝利。

The decision, Fisher v. University of Texas, No. 14-981, concerned an unusual program and contained a warning to other universities that not all affirmative action programs will pass constitutional muster. But the ruling’s basic message was that admissions officials may continue to consider race as one factor among many in ensuring a diverse student body.

該案件是費希爾訴得克薩斯大學案(Fisher v. University of Texas)，第14-981號，法院的裁決涉及一個不同尋常的招生計劃，同時也向其他大學發出了一個警告：並不是所有的平權行動計劃都符合憲法規定。但這個裁決的基本信息是，招生官員可以繼續把族裔作爲一個考慮因素，和其他很多因素一起來確保學生的多元化。

The decision, by a 4-3 vote, was unexpected. Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, the author of the majority opinion, has long been skeptical of race-sensitive programs and had never before voted to uphold an affirmative action plan. He dissented in the last major affirmative action case.

該裁決以4比3票數通過，讓人感到意外。主要意見書作者、大法官安東尼·M·肯尼迪(Anthony M. Kennedy)一貫對種族敏感的項目持懷疑態度，之前從來沒有在投票中支持過平權行動計劃。在上一次的重大平權行動案例中，他屬於異議方。

Supporters of affirmative action hailed the decision as a landmark.

這個裁決引起了平權行動支持者的歡呼，稱其爲一個里程碑。

“No decision since Brown v. Board of Education has been as important as Fisher will prove to be in the long history of racial inclusion and educational diversity,” said Laurence H. Tribe, a law professor at Harvard, referring to the Supreme Court’s 1954 decision striking down segregated public schools.

“在種族包容和教育多樣性的歷史長河中，事實將會證明，自從布朗訴教育局(Brown v. Board of Education)以來，還沒有出現過費希爾這樣重要的案件，”哈佛大學法學教授勞倫斯·H·特賴布(Laurence H. Tribe)說。在他所說的布朗案中，最高法院於1954年裁決廢除公立學校的種族隔離制度。

Roger Clegg, the president of the Center for Equal Opportunity, which supports colorblind policies, said the decision, though disappointing, was only a temporary setback.

機會均等中心(Center for Equal Opportunity)的主席羅傑·克萊格(Roger Clegg)支持不分膚色的政策，他說，這一裁決雖然令人失望，但挫折只是暫時的。

“The court’s decision leaves plenty of room for future challenges to racial preference policies at other schools,” he said. “The struggle goes on.”

“法院的判決留下了足夠的空間，以後還可以對其他學校的種族優惠政策提出挑戰，”他說。“這場鬥爭將繼續下去。”

President Barack Obama hailed the decision. “I’m pleased that the Supreme Court upheld the basic notion that diversity is an important value in our society,” he told reporters at the White House. “We are not a country that guarantees equal outcomes, but we do strive to provide an equal shot to everybody.”

奧巴馬總統對這個裁決予以了稱讚。“我很高興，最高法院維持了基本原則，即多元化是我們社會的重要價值，”他在白宮告訴記者。“我們國家不會保證結果平等，但我們努力爲所有人提供一個平等的機會。”

Kennedy, writing for the majority, said courts must give universities substantial but not total leeway in designing their admissions programs.

肯尼迪代表多數意見方寫道，對於大學的招生計劃安排，法院必須給大學留出很大的，但不是百分之百的餘地。

“A university is in large part defined by those intangible ‘qualities which are incapable of objective measurement but which make for greatness,'” Kennedy wrote, quoting from a landmark desegregation case. “Considerable deference is owed to a university in defining those intangible characteristics, like student body diversity, that are central to its identity and educational mission.”

“從很大程度上說，大學是由一些‘雖不能客觀測量但能使人高尚的那些品質’決定的，”肯尼迪寫道，他引用了一個具有里程碑意義的廢除種族隔離案例。“諸如學生多元構成這樣的無形特徵，是大學自身身份和教育使命的核心，我們理應對定義了這些特徵的大學致以敬意。”

“But still,” Kennedy added, “it remains an enduring challenge to our nation’s education system to reconcile the pursuit of diversity with the constitutional promise of equal treatment and dignity.”

“儘管如此，”肯尼迪說，“要在多元的追求和憲法對平等待遇和尊嚴的承諾之間達成一致，仍然是我國教育體系面臨的一個長期挑戰。”

Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen G. Breyer and Sonia Sotomayor joined Kennedy’s majority opinion. Justice Elena Kagan, who would most likely have voted with the majority, was recused from the case because she had worked on it as solicitor general.

大法官魯思·巴德爾·金斯伯格(Ruth Bader Ginsburg)、史蒂芬·G·佈雷耶(Stephen G. Breyer)、索尼婭·索托馬約爾(Sonia Sotomayor)與肯尼迪意見相似。大法官埃琳娜·卡根(Elena Kagan)很有可能也屬於這一方，不過她曾作爲副司法部長參與過此案，因此需迴避。

In a lengthy and impassioned dissent delivered from the bench, a sign of deep disagreement, Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. denounced the court’s ruling, saying that the university had not demonstrated the need for race-based admissions and that the Texas program benefited advantaged students over impoverished ones.

由大法官小塞繆爾·A·阿利托(Samuel A. Alito Jr.)執筆的不同意見書篇幅很長，且措辭激烈，表明雙方存在嚴重分歧，意見書譴責了最高法院的這個裁決，稱該大學沒有展示出他們有依據種族來招生的需要，而且相對於貧困學生，條件好的學生更能從這個招生計劃中受益。

“This is affirmative action gone berserk,” Alito told his colleagues, adding that what they had done in the case was misguided and “is simply wrong.”

“這是平權行動的忘乎所以，”阿利托對同事們說。他稱他們在受誤導的情況下做出了“完全錯誤”的裁決

Under the University of Texas’ admissions program, most applicants from within the state are admitted under a part of the program that guarantees admission to top students in every high school in the state. This is often called the Top 10 Percent program, though the percentage cutoff can vary by year.

根據的克薩斯大學的招生計劃，對本州大部分申請者都施行“前10%的計劃”，以保證該州每所高中的拔尖學生能被錄取。雖然稱爲前10%，但每年的百分比可能有所不同。

The Top 10 Percent program has produced significant racial and ethnic diversity. In 2011, for instance, 26 percent of freshmen who enrolled under the program were Hispanic, and 6 percent were black. The population of Texas is about 38 percent Hispanic and 12 percent black.

前10%計劃帶來了明顯的族裔多樣性。例如在2011年，根據該計劃招收的新生中有26%是西語裔美國人，6%是黑人。在得克薩斯的總人口中，約38%的西語裔，12%是黑人。

The case challenged a second part of the admissions program. Under it, remaining students from Texas and elsewhere are considered under standards that take into account academic achievement and other factors, including race and ethnicity. Many colleges and universities base all of their admissions decisions on such holistic grounds.

案件挑戰的是該招生計劃的另外一部分。按照相關規定，來自得州和其他地方的其餘學生，就需要依據標準，將學習成績以及包括族裔在內的其他因素考慮在內。很多高校所有的錄取決定都是根據這種整體性依據做出的。

Thursday’s case was brought by Abigail Fisher, a white woman who said the university had denied her admission based on her race. She has since graduated from Louisiana State University.

週四被駁回的案件是由白人女子阿比蓋爾·費希爾(Abigail Fisher)提起的。她說得克薩斯大學奧斯汀分校因爲種族原因拒絕錄取她。目前，她已從路易斯安那州立大學(Louisiana State University)畢業。

“I am disappointed that the Supreme Court has ruled that students applying to the University of Texas can be treated differently because of their race or ethnicity,” Fisher said in a statement Thursday. “I hope that the nation will one day move beyond affirmative action.”

“對於最高法院判定可以因種族或民族而對申請得克薩斯大學的學生區別對待，我深感失望，”費希爾在週四發表的一份聲明中說。“我希望有一天，我國能夠跨越平權行動。”