New Hampshire
How Fisher v. University of Texas applies in New Hampshire: state-specific rules, key cases, and bar exam notes for Constitutional Law.
New Hampshire follows a strict scrutiny standard for any state action that involves racial classifications in higher education admissions. The application of affirmative action is closely examined, similar to the Supreme Court's ruling in Fisher, which emphasizes the need for a compelling interest and narrowly tailored means.
In New Hampshire, institutions of higher education must demonstrate a compelling governmental interest and that the means employed to achieve this interest are narrowly tailored when using race as a factor in admissions decisions.
The court held that any use of race in decision-making must meet the strict scrutiny standard established by federal precedent.
The court upheld the use of demographic diversity in admissions processes but emphasized the necessity of showing a compelling interest.
This case reaffirmed that educational institutions must justify any racially influenced policies in light of both state and federal constitutional requirements.
New Hampshire's approach mirrors the federal standard set forth in Fisher, demanding rigorous justification for affirmative action policies. While the federal government provides a framework, New Hampshire’s state constitution offers limited additional protection, focusing primarily on equal protection rights under its state laws.
Understanding Fisher's implications is critical for the New Hampshire bar exam, particularly in constitutional law sections related to equal protection and affirmative action.