The case of a woman who faults the University of Texas's affirmative-action policies for denying her admission to the institution's flagship Austin campus is headed back to the Supreme Court. A federal appellate court in New Orleans, which had been order to reconsider the issue, once again upheld the process, the Associated Press reported.

The nation's highest tribunal originally agreed to hear Abigail Fisher's lawsuit in June 2013 but did not issue a definitive ruling on affirmative action, a term that refers to admission policies aimed at providing equal access to certain groups deemed to have been historically excluded or underrepresented. In a 7-1 vote, the justices instead returned Fisher's case to the conservative-leaning appellate court, where it had originated.

Since the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals decided to once again uphold the university's admissions policy last year, Fisher, a graduate of Louisiana State University, has asked the Supreme Court for a final ruling. The justices granted her request and agreed to hear arguments in the fall.

Justin Driver, a law professor at the University of Chicago, told the New York Times that Fisher vs. University of Texas may well turn out to be another landmark case for the high court.

"Over the last few days, liberals have been celebrating a string of important victories involving health care and same-sex marriage," Driver said. "But liberals have also been bracing themselves for the other shoe to drop. This decision to grant review means, at a minimum, that the other shoe will remain suspended in midair for the next several months."

Edward Blum, who helped Fisher with her lawsuit, told the AP that he was encouraged by the court's decision to take a second look at their arguments.

"The outcome of this case may bring our nation closer to the day when a student's race and ethnicity is not a factor that a school may consider during the admissions process," Blum said.

Greg Fenves, the University of Texas's president, however, said his institution's admissions policies were narrowly-tailored and constitutional. Fenves argued that using race "as one factor in an individualized, holistic admissions policy allows us to assemble a student body that brings with it the educational benefits of diversity for all students."