Essay --

Geier v. University of Tennessee 597 F.2d 1056 (6th cir 1979)FactsFaculty member of Tennessee State University (TSU) Rita Geier (nee Sanders) sought an injunction with the district court to prohibit the proposed expansion of the University of Tennessee at capital of Tennessee (UT-N). TSU, a historically black university governed by the State Board of Regents, was the only 4-year degree granting public institution in the greater Nashville country duration UT-N operated under the independent governance of the University of Tennessee Board and served as devil-year non-degree granting extension college of the UT system. Geier asserted that the expansion of UT-N to a four-year degree granting institution would hold two separate, distinct, and segregated systems of higher education within the State of Tennessee.The United States, an interviewing plaintiff-appellee, asserted that the State of Tennessee was in violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the fourteenth amendment with the justification that TSU students received unequitable educational opportunities in comparison to students within the University of Tennessee (UT) system. The United States sought for UT-N and TSU to be merged with an additional requirement of a formal picture of integrating to be developed by UT, the Tennessee Higher Education Commission (THEC), and the State Board of Regents (SBR).Geiers request for an injunction was denied based upon the court non purpose records to verify that UT-N was attempting to expand into a degree-granting day institution. The district court did however rule that the State of Tennessees open admission policy was not sufficient enough to satisfy the freedoms protected under the 14th amendment and ordered the state defendants (UT Board, THEC, and... ...ill subject to state and federal governance. The federal constitution was a chance upon agentive role within the district courts decisions as well as the appellate courts decisions and it is imperative that we as policy makers are upholding laws appropriately. Additionally, we after part learn from the inaction of THEC, the SBR, and the UT board. They had several failed attempts to desegregate the system and the district court ruled multiple times that they were not making decorous progress. wherefore they did not make a sustained effort to dismantle the dual system and end segregation can only be hypothesized and as policy makers and campus leaders we can learn from their mistakes. The formation of campus diversity offices and presidential taskforces that consider campus climate are prime examples of how we are more than assured affording students with an equitable educational opportunity. Essay -- Geier v. University of Tennessee 597 F.2d 1056 (6th cir 1979)FactsFaculty member of Tennessee State University (TSU) Rita Geier (nee Sanders) sought an injunction with the district court to prohibit the proposed expansion of the University of Tennessee at Nashvil le (UT-N). TSU, a historically black university governed by the State Board of Regents, was the only 4-year degree granting public institution in the greater Nashville area while UT-N operated under the independent governance of the University of Tennessee Board and served as two-year non-degree granting extension college of the UT system. Geier asserted that the expansion of UT-N to a four-year degree granting institution would maintain two separate, distinct, and segregated systems of higher education within the State of Tennessee.The United States, an interviewing plaintiff-appellee, asserted that the State of Tennessee was in violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th amendment with the justification that TSU students received unequitable educational opportunities in comparison to students within the University of Tennessee (UT) system. The United States sought for UT-N and TSU to be merged with an additional requirement of a formal plan of desegregation to be develope d by UT, the Tennessee Higher Education Commission (THEC), and the State Board of Regents (SBR).Geiers request for an injunction was denied based upon the court not finding records to verify that UT-N was attempting to expand into a degree-granting day institution. The district court did however rule that the State of Tennessees open admission policy was not sufficient enough to satisfy the freedoms protected under the 14th amendment and ordered the state defendants (UT Board, THEC, and... ...ill subject to state and federal governance. The federal constitution was a key factor within the district courts decisions as well as the appellate courts decisions and it is imperative that we as policy makers are upholding laws appropriately. Additionally, we can learn from the inaction of THEC, the SBR, and the UT board. They had several failed attempts to desegregate the system and the district court ruled multiple times that they were not making adequate progress. Why they did not make a sustained effort to dismantle the dual system and end segregation can only be hypothesized but as policy makers and campus leaders we can learn from their mistakes. The formation of campus diversity offices and presidential taskforces that consider campus climate are prime examples of how we are more cognizant affording students with an equitable educational opportunity.