Search results
Gratz v. Bollinger: The Fourteenth Amendment prohibits a public university from using an undergraduate admissions policy in which race is the sole reason behind awarding 20 percent of the minimum points required for admission.
- 491 U.S. 95
Appellants claimed that § 30 violated the Equal Protection...
- 491 U.S. 95
- Qualification
- Background
- Issue
- Results
- Analysis
The University of Michigans Office of Undergraduate Admissions (OUA) considers a number of factors in its evaluative process, such as high school grades, standardized test scores, curriculum strength, alumni relationships, geography, and leadership. The OUA also considers race and admits virtually every qualified applicant from certain groups deter...
In 1995, Jennifer Gratz and Patrick Hamacher both applied for admission to the University of Michigan College of Literature, Science, and the Arts (LSA) as residents of the state of Michigan. Both are of Caucasian descent. Both were denied admission and told that, although they were qualified, they were not competitive enough applicants to be admit...
Did the University of Michigans use of racial preferences in undergraduate admissions violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964? Justice John Paul Stevens wrote a dissenting opinion in which he argued that, because neither of the petitioners could receive any benefit from the relief...
Yes. Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist delivered the opinion for the 6-3 majority. The Court held that the OUAs policies were not sufficiently narrowly tailored to meet the strict scrutiny standard. Because the policy did not provide individual consideration, but rather resulted in the admission of nearly every applicant of underrepresented minori...
In her concurring opinion, Justice Sandra Day OConnor wrote that the record showed that the only individualized consideration in the admissions process came through the Admissions Review Committee. Because the Committee played only a small part in the overall admissions process, it was not sufficient to satisfy the strict scrutiny standard. Justice...
Bollinger decisions, pair of cases addressing the issue of affirmative action in which the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on June 23, 2003, that the undergraduate admissions policy of the University of Michigan violated the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
Apr 13, 2017 · Yes. Judgment: The Court reversed the decision of the federal court of appeals. Reasoning: The use of race in the admission process is not narrowly tailored to achieve diversity and as a result, violates the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.
A state university's admission policy violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment because its ranking system gave an automatic point increase to all racial minorities rather than making individual determinations.
In 1997, Gratz and Hamacher filed a class-action lawsuit against President Lee Bollinger and other university officials claiming the university’s admissions policies violated rights of applicants from 1995 forward under the Fourteenth Amendment equal protection clause as well as the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
On June 23, 2003, the Supreme Court of the United States, in a five to four decision, substantially altered the nature of state imposed affirmative action permissible under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment when it held that diversity could serve as a compelling government interest, thus justifying public sector ...
