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. Bollinger, the supreme court, drawing on justice powells opinion in the 1978 case of regents of the university of california v. 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. Bollinger, 2003 university of michigan admissions standards. Bollinger makes one think of that line, since it gives constitutional approval to the policies used at many colleges and universities that group applicants by race and treat certain groups as. In the 1990s, public opinion and court opinions seemed to signal a death knell for affirmative action. A white woman, she had graduated from michigan state.
Certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the sixth circuit no. May 29, 2012 but at least in the lower courts, opponents of affirmative action had argued that the university of texass use of race was illegal under a 2003 precedent, grutter v. Bamn, cir successfully defended the amendment before the supreme court. What were grutters qualifications for admission to the universitys law school. Bollinger, the us supreme court decided that the university of michigan had acted lawfully. The decision permitted the use of racial preference in student admissions to promote student diversity.
Bollinger 2003, the supreme court ruled that the use of affirmative action in school admission. Bakke, held that student body diversity is a compelling governmental interest that can justify the use of race as a plus factor in a competitive admissions process. Part of the education law stories, this book chapter tells the story behind grutter v. The university of michigan law school denied barbara grutters application to the school. Dec 22, 2019 barbara grutter was a woman living in michigan. Steelcase led the filing of amicus briefs on behalf of 21 multinational companies with others joining later. Bollinger 2003, the path to leadership must be visibly open to talented and qualified individuals of every race and ethnicity. Akron center for reproductive health alaska hire case alden v. Powells conclusions regarding diversity by joining in part vc of his opinion. Petitioners have standing to seek declaratory and injunctive relief. Bollinger, clarence thomas, affirmative action and. Texas, which struck down the use of racial preferences in all states in the fifth circuit, the sixth circuit court of appeals upheld the use of the racial preferences program at the university of michigan. 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. Careful examination of justice clarence thomass dissenting opinion in the landmark affirmative action case grutter v.
Connor of whether the use of race as a factor in student admissions by the university of michigan law school. 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. In a 54 decision announced on june 23, 2003, the supreme court upheld the affirmative action policy. But at least in the lower courts, opponents of affirmative action had argued that the university of texass use of race was illegal under a 2003 precedent, grutter v. 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. A prominent advocate of affirmative action, he played a leading role in the twin supreme court casesgrutter v bollinger and gratz v bollingerthat upheld and clarified the importance of diversity as a compelling justification for affirmative action in higher education. The university of michigan law school denied barbara grutter s application to the school. Bollinger became the nineteenth president of columbia university on june 1, 2002. 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 rules 54 in favor of the university of michigans law school use of race. 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. 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 racism, at its modernday worst grutter v.
Bollinger, challenged the affirmative action admissions practices of the university of michigans law school and undergraduate programs, respectively. 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. Racial preferences cant be used too overtly, the court said, but they. All animals are created equalbut some are more equal than others. Reproductions supplied by edrs are the best that can be. The report also covers trends and status information on college choice, views on financial assistance, changing career aspirations, and plans for graduate school. The admissions statistics show it to be a sham to cover a scheme of racially proportionate admissions. Several years after cirs historic victory in the fifth circuit, hopwood v. When barbara grutter plaintiff, a white michigan resident with a 3.
Bollinger, a challenge to the university of michigan law schools affirmative action program, as recorded by the. The university of michigan law school defendant receives more th. Barbara grutter applied for admission to the university of michigan law school with a personal right guaranteed by the constitution that she would not have her. Case summary the united state supreme court case of grutter v. Grutter filed an injunction against the massive university in 2007. In 2003, the supreme court decided the landmark cases of gratz v. Bollinger presented the question, in the words of associate justice sandra day o. The procedure automatically added 20 points onto the. In 1997, barbara grutter, a white resident of michigan, applied for admission to the university of michigan law school. He also thought that their wish for diversity was just an excuse. Bollinger syllabus military leaders assert that a highly qualified, racially diverse officer corps is essential to national security. She was rejected, even though her grades were higher than some of the minority candidates who were admitted. 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. Bollinger makes one think of that line, since it gives constitutional approval to the policies used at many colleges and universities that group applicants by race and treat certain groups as more equal than others.
Support our response to covid19 your gift will fund our critical work to protect voting rights, demand that vulnerable people in prisons, jails and immigration detention centers be released, and fight to ensure reproductive health care. Furthermore, almost twelve years after the supreme court decided gratz and grutter, the issue is once again back before the supreme court in the case fisher v. Barbara grutter applied to law school at the university of michigan. Affirmative action wins wendy parker1 in 1996, at the age of fortythree, barbara grutter decided a career change was in order. 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. 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. 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. Supreme court, thomas stands a reasonable chance of still being a member of the court in 25 years, the self imposed implosion date. 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. Upon the unanimous adoption of the committees report by the law school faculty, it became the law schools official admissions. Justia us law us case law us supreme court volume 539 grutter v. Learn vocabulary, terms, and more with flashcards, games, and other study tools. Grutter, a white michigan resident, then sued the law school. Bollinger is a united states supreme court case regarding the university of michigan law schools affirmative action admissions policy.
Grutters application the law school at the university of michigan. She applied to a nearby law school, the university of michigan law school, with the hopes of becoming a health care attorney. Higher education research institute black undergraduates. Bollinger, united states supreme court, 2003 case summary for gratz v. Barbara grutter was a 43 yearold single white mother who wanted to attend the university of michigan law school. Nov 01, 2003 the supreme courts recent decision in grutter v.
Mar 20, 2017 following is the case brief for grutter v. Bollingeropinion of antonin scalia the university of michigan law schools mystical critical mass justification for its discrimination by race challenges even the most gullible mind. 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. Bollinger opinion of the court body diversity complied with this courts most recent ruling on the use of race in university admissions. In the supreme court of the united states, barbara grutter. So goes the crucial line in george orwells classic animal farm. Thats what is euphemistically called affirmative action in the. Moreover, because universities, and in particular, law schools, represent the training ground for a large number of the nations leaders, sweatt v. Following is a transcript of arguments before the supreme court in grutter v. The united states supreme court was announced the extremely tight decision of 54 on june 23, 2003. Who was barbara grutter and what did she attempt to do in 1996. Bollinger neal devinst by approving raceconscious university admissions, the rehnquist court echoed the opinions of congress, the states, big business, academics, newspapers, and, to a lesser extent, the bush administration in short, rather than join forces with the politically isolated opponents.
675 161 648 54 807 778 202 608 1056 1261 1336 1163 1200 289 168 486 956 920 880 1529 1516 989 339 1258 664 151 113 1353 146 420 1192