Ap Gov Legal Case

I-Issue
In this court case the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether the University of Michigan uses race as a factor in making admissions decisions, and if this is constitutional. The main question was that, does the University of Michigan’s use of racial preferences in undergraduate admissions violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment or Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964?
II- Facts
In 1995, Jennifer Gratz applied to the University of Michigan's College of Literature, Science and the Arts with an adjusted GPA of 3.8 and ACT score of 25. In 1997, Patrick Hamacher applied to the University with an adjusted GPA of 3.0, and an ACT score of 28. Both were denied admission and attended other schools. Gratz and Hamacher were contacted by the Center for Individual Rights, which filed a lawsuit on their behalf in October 1997. The University admits that it uses race as a factor in making admissions decisions because it serves a "compelling interest in achieving diversity among its student body." In addition, the University has a policy to admit virtually all qualified applicants who are members of one of three select racial minority groups - African Americans, Hispanics, and Native Americans - that are considered to be "underrepresented" on the campus. The main topics of this case that were touched upon is that if the University of Michigan had the right to use racial profiling to keep a balance of all races among its students body, or if they used racial profiling to pick and choose which students they wanted to admit into their school
III-Decision
To answer the question asked. Does the University of Michigan’s use of racial preferences in undergraduate admissions violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment or Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964? The Supreme Court decided that the University of Michigan's use of racial preferences in undergraduate admissions violates both the Equal Protection Clause and... [continues]

Read full essay