University of california vs bakke. Regents of the University of California v. Bakke 2022-12-25
University of california vs bakke Rating:
7,7/10
848
reviews
The University of California vs. Bakke was a landmark Supreme Court case that dealt with the issue of affirmative action in college admissions. The case was brought by Allan Bakke, a white applicant who was twice denied admission to the University of California, Davis School of Medicine. Bakke argued that the university's use of racial quotas in its admissions process violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of race.
The University of California defended its use of affirmative action, arguing that it was necessary to achieve diversity in its student body and to remedy the effects of past discrimination. The university argued that diversity in the student body was essential to the educational mission of the university, and that the use of racial quotas was a necessary means of achieving that diversity.
In a split decision, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Bakke, holding that the use of racial quotas in college admissions was unconstitutional. However, the Court also held that race could be considered as a factor in college admissions in order to achieve diversity, as long as it was not the sole factor.
The University of California vs. Bakke case was significant because it established the legal precedent for the use of affirmative action in college admissions. While it allowed for the consideration of race in admissions decisions, it also set limits on the use of racial quotas and ensured that race could not be the sole factor in admissions decisions.
Overall, the University of California vs. Bakke case highlights the ongoing debate over the use of affirmative action in higher education. While some argue that affirmative action is necessary to remedy the effects of past discrimination and to promote diversity, others believe that it unfairly discriminates against certain groups and should not be used in college admissions. The case continues to be an important precedent in the debate over affirmative action and its role in higher education.
Regents of the University of California v. Bakke (1978)
As reflected in the majority opinion, the medical school did not by any means accept all minority students who applied for admission; in 1973, the school granted interviews to only one-third of the special admission applicants, and in 1974, only one-sixth of such applicants were interviewed. Petitioner also points out that Title VI contains no explicit grant of a private right of action, in contrast to Titles II, III, IV, and VII, of the same statute, Section 602, as set forth in "Each Federal department and agency which is empowered to extend Federal financial assistance to any program or activity, by way of grant, loan, or contract other than a contract of insurance or guaranty, is authorized and directed to effectuate the provisions of section 2000d of this title with respect to such program or activity by issuing rules, regulations, or orders of general applicability which shall be consistent with achievement of the objectives of the statute authorizing the financial assistance in connection with which the action is taken. 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. We stated: Under these state-imposed standards, there is no equality of treatment merely by providing students with the same facilities, textbooks, teachers, and curriculum, for students who do not understand English are effectively foreclosed from any meaningful education. Greenberger, Samuel Rabinove, Themis N. Indeed, petitioner has not shown that its preferential classification is likely to have any significant effect on the problem.
Bakke V. University of California … Appeal: 1978
The Director shall improve the representation of minorities, women, and handicapped individuals on advisory committees,, review panels, and all other mechanisms by which the scientific community provides assistance to the Foundation. Thus the court denied Bakke's prayer for an injunction ordering his admission. Beginning with Justice Stone's celebrated "footnote 4" in U. The Regular Admission Program Initially, members of the regular committee determine whether the applicant reflects sufficient promise to warrant a personal interview. Feller, and Ernest Gellhorn for the Association of American Law Schools; by John Holt Myers for the Association of American Medical Colleges; by Jerome B. JUSTICE BLACKMUN join Parts I and V-C of this opinion.
This purpose was first expressed in President Kennedy's June 19, 1963, message to Congress proposing the legislation that subsequently became the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The court enjoined petitioner from considering respondent's race or the race of any other applicant in making admissions decisions. It is not an interest in simple ethnic diversity, in which a specified percentage of the student body is in effect guaranteed to be members of selected ethnic groups, with the remaining percentage an undifferentiated aggregation of students. Physicians serve a heterogeneous population. See Part V, infra. Human suffering draws no color lines, and the administration of help to the sufferers should not.
The University of California V. Bakke: The Court's Three Decisions
Bakke and the Political Process In resolving conflicts like that in Bakke, the courts have a proper—indeed indispensable—role to play. Family Publications Service, Inc. There is, however, absolutely no indication in the instant record that the special admission program at Davis was instituted to discriminate against a particular subclass of nonminorities, nor is there any claim that the program had in fact such a differential impact. JUSTICE MARSHALL, and MR. It is true that strong suspicion that grades have been weighted much too heavily in predicting performance in medical school and after graduation from medical school is what led to the initiation of this whole study in the first instance; but to have that suspicion so forcefully corroborated has led me to question the adequacy of some of our traditional admission policies, as well as the reliability of conventional grades as a measure of progress of the student during his medical course, or as the sole criterion for promotion, or as a dependable predictor of future success in practice. Morgan, supra, Moreover, as the medical school asserts, the minority background of an applicant is relevant to his qualification for medical school and medical practice for reasons beyond the correction of culturally biased academic credentials.
University of California Regents v. Bakke, 438 U.S. 265
The majority, however, can cite no decision which supports this conclusion. One should not lightly dismiss the inherent unfairness of, and the perception of mistreatment that accompanies, a system of allocating benefits and privileges on the basis of skin color and ethnic origin. In the recent Washington decision, however, a majority of the United States Supreme Court exhibited no hostility whatever to a trial court finding that the Washington, D. Odegaard 1974 The view that "preferential" racial classifications are stigmatizing, moreover, overlooks the fact that such classifications are often imposed by courts or by executive order in recognition of the fact that minorities continue to be the victims of racial discrimination which cannot easily be detected or proven. The letter distributed the following year was virtually identical, except that the third paragraph was omitted.
JUSTICE STEVENS, joined by THE CHIEF JUSTICE, MR. The former may well be contrary to the requirements of the Fourteenth Amendment where state action is involved , while the latter presents very different constitutional considerations. Bakke shall recover his costs on these appeals. Pasadena City Board of Education v. But even at the graduate level, our tradition and experience lend support to the view that the contribution of diversity is substantial.
Regents of University of California v. Bakke 438 U.S. 265 (1978)
Sixteen persons were admitted under the special program in 1974, ibid. The further refinements sometimes required help to illustrate the kind of significance attached to race. Petitioner did not arrange for respondent to attend a different medical school in order to desegregate Davis Medical School; instead, it denied him admission and may have deprived him altogether of a medical education. West Virginia, Korematsu v. At the same time, the preferred applicants have the opportunity to compete for every seat in the class. We are not asked to determine whether groups other than those favored by the Davis program should similarly be favored. In asserting that the accepted minority students are less qualified than rejected applicants, the majority in effect endow standardized test scores and grade point averages with a greater significance than the medical school attributes to them or than independent studies have shown they will bear.
Racial classifications in admissions conceivably could serve a fifth purpose, one which petitioner does not articulate: fair appraisal of each individual's academic promise in the light of some cultural bias in grading or testing procedures. See generally Vaas, Title VII: The Legislative History, 7 B. See also Bickel, The Original Understanding and the Segregation Decision, 69 Harv. His 1973 interview was with Dr. Some attrition in acceptances normally occurs each year, and applicants whose ratings approximate those admitted may be placed on an alternate list.
The Regents of the University of California v. Bakke
Yet a reading of Title VI as prohibiting all action predicated upon race which adversely affects any individual would require recipients guilty of discrimination to await the imposition of such remedies by the Executive Branch. Board of Education, 17 Cal. We disagree with our Brother POWELL's suggestion, ante, at 303, that the presence of "rival groups which can claim that they, too, are entitled to preferential treatment" distinguishes the gender cases or is relevant to the question of scope of judicial review of race classifications. Contrary to the majority's assertion, time-honored constitutional principles and precedent by no means establish that the special admission program at issue in this case violates the Fourteenth Amendment. See remarks of Senator Humphrey id. To the extent that there existed a pool of at least minimally qualified minority applicants to fill the 16 special admissions seats, white applicants could compete only for 84 seats in the entering class, rather than the 100 open to minority applicants. Bakke case took place on October 8, 1977.
