Akron center for reproductive health alaska hire case alden v. He believes that it is appropriate for an applicants race to be considered because the law school seeks a student body with diverse backgrounds and. The united states supreme court was announced the extremely tight decision of 54 on june 23, 2003. Connor of whether the use of race as a factor in student admissions by the university of michigan law school. This june marks the 10th anniversary of the united states supreme courts decision in grutter v.
The lower court concluded that the prospectiverelief claim based. On writ of certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the sixth circuit june 23, 2003 justice scalia, with whom justice thomas joins, concurring in part and dissenting in part. Bollinger, challenged the affirmative action admissions practices of the university of michigans undergraduate and law school programs, respectively. Affirmative action wins wendy parker1 in 1996, at the age of fortythree, barbara grutter decided a career change was in order. Bollinger, we look back at president fords defense of affirmative action in higher education. Bollinger this affirmative action case involved a person applying for admission to the university of michigans law school. The two cases were filed in 1997 by white plaintiffs who alleged that the universitys use of race violated their constitutional right to equal protection. Grutter v bollinger journal of ethics american medical. Following is a transcript of arguments before the supreme court in grutter v. Bollinger, a case decided by the united states supreme court on june 23, 2003, upheld the affirmative action admissions policy of the university of michigan law school.
They thus look for academic ability as well potential to contribute to the learning of those around them. The procedure automatically added 20 points onto the. The university of michigan law school denied barbara grutter s application to the school. As to public education, data for the years 20002001 show that 71. Bollinger opinion of the court body diversity complied with this courts most recent ruling on the use of race in university admissions. The two cases were filed in 1997 by white plaintiffs who alleged that the universitys use of race violated their constitutional right to equal protection of the laws. Bollinger, challenged the affirmative action admissions practices of the university of michigans law school and undergraduate programs, respectively. Bollinger, which upheld the use of affirmative action by the university of michigan law school.
Supreme court, thomas stands a reasonable chance of still being a member of the court in 25 years, the self imposed implosion date sunset provision established by. Bollinger, 539 us 244 supreme court 2003 ninth circuit. Bollinger, though it ruled that race could not be the preeminent factor in such decisions as it struck down the universitys undergraduate admissions policy that awarded points to students on the basis of race gratz v. The decision dissenting opinions chief justice reinquist believed that the law school was tailoring to a certain group of people and that they were practicing racial balancing, which shouldnt have been allowed. Syllabus guidelines for those seeking admission to the lsa. The court held that a student admissions process that favors underrepresented minority groups does not violate the fourteenth amendments equal protection clause so long as it takes into account other factors evaluated on an individual. Justice sandra day oconnor, writing for the majority in a 54 decision, ruled that the university of michigan law school had a compelling interest in promoting class diversity.
A landmark case the grutter case affirmed and refined the supreme courts position on affirmative action a quarter century after its initial decision in regents of university of california v. Supreme court expressed, through justice sandra day oconnor, that achieving the educational benefits that come from a diverse student body was a enough of a compelling interest to authenticate taking race into consideration in making admissions decisions to higher education. In a 63 decision announced on june 23, 2003, chief justice rehnquist, writing for the court, ruled the universitys point systems predetermined point allocations that awarded 20 points towards admission to. It is not intended to constitute legal advice nor does. Start studying ap government supreme court cases quiz. Bollinger, 2003majority opinion 54 the law school seeks to enroll a critical mass of minority students. Opinion of the court body diversity complied with this courts most recent ruling on the use of race in university. Two caucasians challenged the university of michigans admissions policy after being denied entry into the undergraduate program, claiming the procedure violated the 14th amendments equal protection clause. Ms grutter and ms gratz allege that the university gives unlawful preference based on race when considering students for. Learn vocabulary, terms, and more with flashcards, games, and other study tools. The court made clear that affirmative action programs are only constitutional if they consider race as one factor in.
Diversity is a compelling interest that can justify the narrowly tailored use of race when public universities select applicants for admission. Bollinger racism, at its modernday worst grutter v. The university of michigan law school law school, one of the nations top law schools, follows an official admissions policy that seeks to achieve student body diversity through compliance with regents of univ. Thats what is euphemistically called affirmative action in the. This court granted certiorari in both cases, even though the sixth circuit had not yet rendered judgment in this one. The law schools interest is not simply to assure within its student body some specified percentage of a particular group merely because of its race or ethnic origin. University of texas at austin, the supreme court vacated and remanded an appeals court decision that had rejected a challenge to an affirmative action program modeled on the one approved in gratz, finding that the lower. In the 1990s, public opinion and court opinions seemed to signal a death knell for affirmative action.
The two cases were filed in 1997 by white plaintiffs who alleged that the universitys use of race violated their constitutional right to equal protection of. In a 54 decision announced on june 23, 2003, the supreme court upheld the affirmative action policy. Bollinger, clarence thomas, affirmative action and. Because of this ruling, the court also required that the verdict in the case of bakke v.
Oconnor stevens, souter, ginsburg, breyer concurring. She applied to a nearby law school, the university of michigan law school, with the hopes of becoming a health care attorney. Bollinger 2003 barbara grutter, michigan resident and applicant to the law school at the university of michigan, filed an injunction against the university in 2007. California, grutter claimed that the university of michigan violated her 14th amendment rights. Grutter claimed that the law schools use of affirmative action in its admissions policy violated her equal. Case summary the united state supreme court case of grutter v. The united states supreme court ruled in favor of the university of michigan. Grutter, a white michigan resident, then sued the law school. Bollinger was a case brought to the supreme court over the use of affirmative action in the college admissions process. While interlocutory appeals were pending in the sixth circuit, that court issued an opinion in grutter v. The united states supreme court was announced the extremely tight decision of.
Bollinger 2003, the supreme court ruled that the use of affirmative action in school admission is constitutional if it treats race as one factor. Bollinger were among the most anticipated rulings in recent history. In 1997, barbara grutter, a white resident of michigan, applied for admission to the university of michigan law school. Bollinger, united states supreme court, 2003 case summary for gratz v. Careful examination of justice clarence thomass dissenting opinion in the landmark affirmative action case grutter v. The admissions statistics show it to be a sham to cover a scheme of racially proportionate admissions. Upon the unanimous adoption of the committees report by the law school faculty, it became the law schools official admissions.
Bollinger presented the question, in the words of associate justice sandra day o. The university of michigan law school defendant receives more th. Syllabus opinion oconnor concurrence ginsburg dissent rehnquist dissent kennedy other opinion of scalia other opinion of thomas html version pdf version. This material is provided for informational purposes only. He also thought that their wish for diversity was just an excuse. The decision permitted the use of racial preference in student admissions to promote student diversity. Bollinger is a united states supreme court case regarding the university of michigan law schools affirmative action admissions policy. The university of michigan law school denied acceptance to. A case in which the court held that the university of michigans practice of favoring applicants of certain races in the admissions process. Bollinger opinion of antonin scalia the university of michigan law schools mystical critical mass justification for its discrimination by race challenges even the most gullible mind. Bollinger, a similar case, and upheld the universitys admission policies in that case.
Bollinger, a challenge to the university of michigan law schools affirmative action program, as recorded by the. The university of michigan law school denied barbara grutters application to the school. Legal scholars, media commentators, and laypeople alike eagerly awaited the release of the courts decision on whether the use of race in the admissions processes of institutions of higher education would be held. The law school admits that it uses race as a factor in making admissions decisions because it serves a compelling interest in.
They seek a student body that can successfully study and learn the law, as well as contribute to a mix of varying backgrounds. Bollinger 2003barbara grutter, michigan resident and applicant to the law school at the university of michigan, filed an injunction against the university in 2007. A white woman, she had graduated from michigan state. Intergroup relations after affirmative action, 86 calif. Argued april 1, 2003decided june 23, 2003 the university of michigan law school law school, one of the nations top law schools, follows an of. The petitioners in this case then asked the court to grant certiorari, despite the lack of opinion from the lower court, to resolve the issue. Also, the program adequately ensures that all factors. The use of an applicants race as one factor in an admissions policy of a public educational institution does not violate the equal protection clause of the fourteenth amendment if the policy is narrowly tailored to the compelling interest of promoting a diverse student body, and if it uses a holistic process to evaluate each applicant, as opposed to a quota system. President bollinger sought to ensure that the policy complied with the supreme courts ruling in regents of the univ. Ap government supreme court cases quiz flashcards quizlet. Court of appeals for the sixth circuit heard this case the same day as grutter v. Contributing to the growing legal literature on social movements and constitutional culture, this article uses the widespread public mobilization that occurred around grutter v. Supreme courts admonition to seriously consider other options before using raceconscious admissions policies schmidt, 2008, p. Bollinger was heard in the united states supreme court.
Justice sandra day oconnor, writing for the majority in a 54 decision, ruled that the university of michigan law school had a compelling interest in. Michigan law school case implementation of the critical massharvard plan. In reversing, the court of appeals held that justice powells opinion in regents of the university of california v. Part of the education law stories, this book chapter tells the story behind grutter v.
595 83 1423 1078 251 808 1328 836 115 519 229 32 1598 1626 638 1319 1207 569 1072 162 989 130 1274 332 1512 599 582 439 1414 718 298 583 955 1638 1626 1148 887 59 206 1437 238 833 344 310 409 99 820