미국 대학입학정책에서의 적극적 평등실현조치의 위헌성여부 = The Unconstitutionality of Affirmative Action in U. S. College Admissions Policies

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

Affirmative action is becoming an important issue related to the role of education for the value of equality and to elevate equal opportunity in American college admissions policies. In particular, the biggest issue with college admissions policies in the United States is preference given to racial minorities. While there are criticism made that race-based affirmative action is founded on stereotypes based on the skin color of applicants, but regardless of the form in the lives of people of color, race has brought upon the actual results of continuing racial subordination.
The unconstitutionality of affirmative action in college admissions policies has been reviewed in the Supreme Court, and this has once again brought about changes in college admissions policies. Universities have created admissions policies within the scope allowed by the constitution according to the guidelines given through Supreme Court rulings.
Accordingly, this study examined the Supreme Court’s decisions related to affirmative action for US college admissions policies. In particular, it reviewed the main contents and legal principles of the recent case, Fisher v. University of Texas (Fisher I) (2013) and Fisher v. University of Texas (Fisher II) (2016). The strict scrutiny applied to race-conscious admissions policies of the University of Texas at Austin was examined and it was also reviewed whether the “narrow tailoring” requirement other than compelling interests was satisfied. In addition, regarding “narrow tailoring” requirement, the meaning of critical mass and the importance of race-neutral alternatives were examined. Also, the meaning of changes made through the US Supreme Court rulings on affirmative action was reviewed.
Such study can help judge whether to allow and the scope of affirmative action in Korean college admissions policies. Furthermore, it can help examine the judicial review standards and requirements that should be applied to judge the unconstitutionality of detailed admissions policies. Even if universities show consideration for people with various social and economic disadvantages through its admissions policies, this should not violate the equal rights of the constitution.

국문 초록 (Abstract)

미국 대학입학정책에서 적극적 평등실현조치는 평등의 가치와 기회의 평등을 증진시키기 위한 교육의 역할과 관련해 중요한 문제가 되고 있으며, 특히 대학입학정책에서 문제되고 있는 것은 인종적 소수자에 대한 우대이다. 인종에 근거한 적극적 평등실현조치에 대하여 지원자의 피부색에 근거한 고정관념에 기초한 것이라는 비판도 제기되고 있지만, 인종은 유색인종의 삶속에서 어떤 형태로든 인종적 종속을 지속시키는 실질적 결과를 가져오고 있다.
미국 대학입학정책에서 사용된 적극적 평등실현조치는 연방대법원에서 그 위헌성 여부가 다투어졌으며, 이는 다시 대학의 입학정책에서의 변화를 가져왔다. 연방대법원 판결에서 제시하는 일정한 기준에 따라 대학들은 헌법상 허용되는 범주 내에서 입학정책을 마련하여 왔다.
이에 본 논문에서는 미국 대학입학정책에서의 적극적 평등실현조치와 관련된 연방대법원의 판결, 특히 2013년의 Fisher v. University of Texas 판결(Fisher I 판결)과 2016년 Fisher v. University of Texas 판결(Fisher II 판결)의 주요내용과 법리를 검토함으로써 인종에 근거한 적극적 평등실현조치의 위헌여부를 판단하는 심사기준과 구체적 입학정책의 위헌성여부를 살펴보고자 한다. 먼저 인종을 고려한 입학정책에 대하여 엄격심사기준을 적용함에 있어서, 필요불가피한 이익이라는 요건과 엄밀하게 재단되어질 것이라는 요건이 충족되었는지를 검토한다. 특히 후자의 요건과 관련하여 ‘필요 충분한 인원’의 의미와 인종중립적 대안의 심사에 관하여 살펴본다. 나아가 인종중립적 대안으로 여겨지고 있는 상위 10퍼센트 입학정책의 경우 과연 인종중립적인 것인지, 평등권을 침해하는 것인지에 대한 논의를 검토한다.
이러한 연구는 직접적으로 인종과 관계되지는 않았지만 우리나라 대학입학정책에서의 적극적 평등실현조치의 허용여부와 그 범위를 판단하는데 도움이 될 수 있으며, 또한 대학의 구체적 입학정책의 위헌성 여부를 판단하기 위해 적용되어야 할 심사기준과 그 요건을 검토하는데 도움을 줄 수 있다. 대학이 입학정책을 통하여 다양한 사회･경제적 약자를 배려하는 경우에도 평등권에 합치되는 것이어야 한다.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 김지영, "적극적 평등실현조치에 대한 미국 연방대법원의 위헌심사" 헌법재판연구원 2017

2 박승호, "미연방대법원과 적극적 평등실현조치" 한국헌법학회 12 (12): 287-337, 2006

3 염철현, "미국의 공립대학 입학정책에서 Affirmative Action 운영 사례와 법원 판결의 최근 동향" 대한교육법학회 23 (23): 123-147, 2011

4 최정욱, "미국 텍사스의 내신 상위 10% 자동입학제와 지역 격차 해소를 위한 대학입학정책" 한국민주주의연구소 (37) : 238-276, 2017

5 최경호, "미국 대학입시에 있어 인종적 다양성 고려를 위한 적극적 평등실현조치- 미연방대법원 최근판례 Fisher v. University of Texas(2013)를 중심으로 -" 법학연구소 19 (19): 83-108, 2014

6 최희경, "미국 고등교육에 있어서의 적극적 평등실현조치" 한국헌법학회 18 (18): 481-514, 2012

7 Madiraju, Kartik Sameer, "Whatever Happened to The Green Factors? Affirmative Action Through The Lens of Desegregation law" 41 : 57-, 2018

8 Ziegler, Mary, "What is Race?: The New Constitutional Politics of Affirmative Action" 50 : 279-, 2018

9 Danielson, Aaron, "Thinking Hard About ‘Race-Neutral’ admissions" 47 : 967-, 2014

10 "The Supreme Court-Leading Cases" 127 : 258-, 2013

11 Crump, David, "The Narrow Tailoring in the Affirmative Action Cases: Reconsidering the Supreme Court's Approval in Gratz and Grutter of Race-Based Decision-Making by Individualized Discretion" 56 : 483-, 2004

12 Fitzpatrick, Brian T., "The Hidden Question in Fisher" 10 : 168-, 2016

13 Boddie, Elise C., "The Future of Affirmative Action" 130 : 38-, 2016

14 Brown-Nagin, Tomiko, "The Diversity Paradox: Judicial Review in an Age of Demographic and Educational Change" 65 : 113-, 2012

15 Spann, Girardeau A., "The Dark Side of Grutter" 21 : 221-, 2004

16 Fitzpatrick, Brian T., "Strict Scrutiny of Facially Race-Neutral State Action and the Texas Ten Percent Plan" 53 : 290-, 2001

17 Brown-Nagin, Tomiko, "Rethinking Proxies for Disadvantage in Higher Education: A First Generation Students’ Project" 433-, 2014

18 Ngov, Eang L., "Qualitative Diversity: Affirmative Action's New Reframe" 423-, 2017

19 Poreda, Michael, "Perspectives on Fisher v. University of Texas and the Strict Scrutiny Standard in the University Admissions Context" 319-, 2013

20 Thomas, Edward C., "Note, Racial Classification and the Flawed Pursuit of Diversity: How Phantom Minorities Threaten “Critical Mass” Justification in Higher Education" 813-, 2007

21 Harpalani, Vinay, "Narrowly Tailored but Broadly Compelling: Defending Race-Conscious Admissions after Fisher" 45 : 761-, 2015

22 Pleasant, Shakira D., "More than Just the Numbers: Fisher v. Texas and the Practical Impact of Texas’s Top Ten Percent Law" 24 : 111-, 2016

23 Joshi, Yuvrai, "Measuring Diversity" 117 : 54-, 2017

24 Barnes, Mario L., "Judging Opportunity Lost: Assessing the Viability of Race-Based Affirmative Action after Fisher v. University of Texas" 62 : 271-, 2015

25 Carbado, Devon W., "Intraracial Diversity" 60 : 1130-, 2013

26 Oluwole, Joseph O., "Harrowing Through Narrow Tailoring: Voluntary Race-Conscious Student-Assignment Plans, Parents Involved and Fisher" 14 : 705-, 2014

27 Bloom, Jr, Lackland H., "Grutter and Gratz: A Critical Analysis" 41 : 459-, 2004

28 Ngov, Eang L., "Following Fisher: Narrowly Tailoring Affirmative Action" 64 : 1-, 2014

29 Robinson, Kimberly Jenkins, "Fisher’s Cautionary Tale and the Urgent Need Equal Access to an Excellent Education" 130 : 185-, 2016

30 Smolla, Rodney A., "Fisher v. University of Texas: Who Put the Holes in “Holistic”?" 9 : 31-, 2013

31 Lee, Rebecca K., "Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin: Promoting Full Judicial Review and Process in Applying Strict Scrutiny" 4 : 33-, 2013

32 Zisk, Nancy L., "Embracing Race-Conscious College Admissions Programs: How Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin Redefines “Affirmative Action” as a Holistic Approach to Admissions that Ensures Equal, Not Preferential, Treatment" 100 : 835-, 2017

33 Joshi, Yuvrai, "Bakke to the Future: Affirmative Action After Fisher" 69 : 17-, 2016

34 Nelson, Eboni S., "Assessing the Viability of Race-Neutral Alternatives in Law School Admissions" 102 : 2187-, 2017

35 Schuck, Peter H., "Affirmative Action: Past, Present, and Future" 20 : 1-, 2002