|
|
|
|
|
|
News Releases & Articles
| Statements by University Leaders & Others
| Press Kits, Photos & Media Contacts |
|
| Summary of the Bakke Case | |
| Official Name: | Regents of the University of California v. Bakke |
| Court: | U.S. Supreme Court (on appeal from the California Supreme Court which struck down the program and entered an order prohibiting any use of race in admissions) |
| Date: | Decided in 1978 |
| Program Challenged: | The case involves the admissions program to the University of California Medical School at Davis. Out of an entering class of 100, UC set aside 16 spaces for students admitted through a "special admissions program" for minority applicants. |
| Supreme Court Decision: |
A majority of the Supreme Court—five justices—held that while the UC program was unconstitutional because it involved a quota, it was lawful to take race into account in admissions. Justices Brennan, Blackmun, Marshall and White (the so-called "Brennan 4") joined in Section V(C) of Justice Powell's opinion which says: |
"In enjoining petitioner from ever considering the race of any applicant, however, the courts below failed to recognize that the State has a substantial interest that legitimately may be served by a properly devised admissions program involving the competitive consideration of race and ethnic origin. For this reason, so much of the California court's judgment as enjoins petitioner from any consideration of the race of any applicant must be reversed." |
|
| The other four justices (Stevens, Burger, Stewart and Rehnquist) agreed that the UC quota program was unlawful but they would not have decided it under the constitution. Rather, they would have ruled it unlawful under Title VI, the federal civil rights statute. | |
| There were six opinions written. Justice Powell's opinion is the controlling opinion of the Court because his opinion is the narrowest ground supporting the majority's conclusion that race can be used in college admissions. The three major opinions are summarized below. | |
| Justice Powell's Opinion: | Justice Powell wrote the controlling opinion of the Court because his opinion is the narrowest ground supporting the use of race in college admissions. Powell wrote that the use of race should be subject to "strict scrutiny" meaning that: (1) there should be a compelling governmental interest in using race; and (2) the program must be necessary—or narrowly tailored to achieve—that interest. Powell found that the educational benefits of diversity were a compelling governmental interest justifying the use of race as a "plus factor" in admissions. Powell said that race can be considered as one of many factors and can influence admissions decisions when the university is trying to achieve overall diversity. |
| Opinion of "Brennan 4": | Justices Brennan, Blackmun, Marshall and White would not have applied "strict scrutiny" to the use of race in college admissions. They believed that a less exacting standard was appropriate when the use of race was remedial. And, they found that the need to remedy past discrimination was a sufficient rationale to support the use of race in college admissions. |
| Opinion of Stevens, Burger, Stewart and Rehnquist: | These justices agreed with the other five that the UC quota program was unlawful but would not have decided the question of whether the program was unconstitutional. Rather, they found that the UC program was unlawful based on Title VI, the federal civil rights statute. |
|
November 16, 2000 |
|
 |
|
Questions? Comments? Please send e-mail to diversitymatters@umich.edu.
|