programs. I respectfully dissent from the denial of en banc rehearing. * In 2009, the court decided to begin identifying the judges voting for or against en banc rehearing where a poll is taken and the request for en banc rehearing is denied. 1 . 539 U.S. 306, 123 S.Ct. 2325 (2003). 2 . Adarand Constructors, Inc. v. Pena, 515 U.S. 200, 115 S.Ct. 2097, 132 L.Ed.2d 158 (1995). 3 . I do not disagree with the panel's conclusion that following Grutter, we may presume a university's good faith in the decision that it has a compelling interest in achieving racial and other student diversity. But that is as about as far as deference should go. 4 . The Fisher panel is simply wrong in attempting to divorce Grutter s standards from those of employment discrimination cases. Fisher, 631 F.3d at 233 (<HOLDING>). Both Grutter and Parents Involved routinely
holding that employment cases have little purchase in this challenge to university admissions holding that only deliberate clear and unambiguous statements are judicial admissions recognizing the right to intervene in cases like this holding that parties are bound by admissions in pleadings recognizing that statements in appellees brief can constitute judicial admissions