Compare And Contrast Grutter And Gratz
Grutter and Gratz Distinguished, set apart from, or excelling others of its kind. Or in other words, special treatment. The law likes to stand by a claim that no group of people receives special treatment, while coincidently, no group receives unfair treatment. However, the world we live in is not a perfect one, so discrimination is a common thing. The most common form of discrimination our country experiences is racial discrimination. Minority groups living in America often feel that they are discriminated against. The Constitution of the United States has strived to create a world where people from every race and ethnicity can enjoy the same natural rights in our country.The Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, states
…show more content…
Bollinger, and Gratz v. Bollinger, and in both cases, caucasian applicants felt that they had been unfairly denied admission. They believed they were being reversely discriminated against, as they watched applicants from minority groups receive benefits they did not have access to. These benefits helped the minority students get into specific universities, while caucasian applicants were beat out. In these situations, I do not believe obtaining a critical mass of minority students is that important. If the fact that they are a minority has not put them at a financial or educational disadvantage, than there is no reason that only a certain group of people should be given automatic benefits, just for their race.
Let’s take a closer look at the court case Grutter v. Bollinger. In this case, justices upheld the affirmative action policy that the University of Michigan had in place. In previous cases, colleges were allowed to consider race as a factor in the admissions policy. This is what is known as a precedent, which is defined as an earlier event or action that is regarded as an example or guide to be considered in subsequent similar circumstances. In Grutter v. Bollinger, the members of justice decided to continue to allow race to be considered as a factor in the admission
Bollinger, and Gratz v. Bollinger, and in both cases, caucasian applicants felt that they had been unfairly denied admission. They believed they were being reversely discriminated against, as they watched applicants from minority groups receive benefits they did not have access to. These benefits helped the minority students get into specific universities, while caucasian applicants were beat out. In these situations, I do not believe obtaining a critical mass of minority students is that important. If the fact that they are a minority has not put them at a financial or educational disadvantage, than there is no reason that only a certain group of people should be given automatic benefits, just for their race.
Let’s take a closer look at the court case Grutter v. Bollinger. In this case, justices upheld the affirmative action policy that the University of Michigan had in place. In previous cases, colleges were allowed to consider race as a factor in the admissions policy. This is what is known as a precedent, which is defined as an earlier event or action that is regarded as an example or guide to be considered in subsequent similar circumstances. In Grutter v. Bollinger, the members of justice decided to continue to allow race to be considered as a factor in the admission