Grutter vs. Bollinger
Steven Ehyss
Constitutional Law & Public Policy
4 December 2012
Grutter v. Bollinger
Thesis
Without the amendments to the Constitution, minorities would lack proper protection of their rights to live a life of liberty. It took adding an amendment to partially abolish slavery and another one to give rights to those descending from the slaves. The historical significance of discrimination has lingered into all facets of life for those supremely affected by it. For the population unaffected by discrimination, namely those of European descent, such laws as the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Affirmative Action are seen as unjust and prejudicial. The law should uphold using favorable racial requirements for minorities as long as it does not undermine the nonminority population.
Issue
Does the University of Michigan Law School’s use of racial preferences in student admissions violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment or Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964?
Rule and Analysis
The opinion of the court was delivered by Justice O’Connor in which she affirms the school’s use of racial preference in its admissions decisions. The GPA and LSAT score of an applicant does not outright admit or deny them entry into the law school. The use of “soft variables” such as enthusiasm of recommenders, the quality of the undergraduate admission, the quality of the applicant’s essay, and the areas and difficulty of undergraduate course selection bears in assessing an “applicants likely contributions to the intellectual and social life of the institution” (“Grutter v. Bollinger” 316). The underrepresentation of African-Americans, Hispanics, and Native Americans in college due to the historical discrimination against them is delineated by the admissions policy of Michigan Law School. Justice Thomas’s opinion in Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, “the use of race for the attainment of a diverse student body”, has set a legal precedence.
Constitutional Law & Public Policy
4 December 2012
Grutter v. Bollinger
Thesis
Without the amendments to the Constitution, minorities would lack proper protection of their rights to live a life of liberty. It took adding an amendment to partially abolish slavery and another one to give rights to those descending from the slaves. The historical significance of discrimination has lingered into all facets of life for those supremely affected by it. For the population unaffected by discrimination, namely those of European descent, such laws as the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Affirmative Action are seen as unjust and prejudicial. The law should uphold using favorable racial requirements for minorities as long as it does not undermine the nonminority population.
Issue
Does the University of Michigan Law School’s use of racial preferences in student admissions violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment or Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964?
Rule and Analysis
The opinion of the court was delivered by Justice O’Connor in which she affirms the school’s use of racial preference in its admissions decisions. The GPA and LSAT score of an applicant does not outright admit or deny them entry into the law school. The use of “soft variables” such as enthusiasm of recommenders, the quality of the undergraduate admission, the quality of the applicant’s essay, and the areas and difficulty of undergraduate course selection bears in assessing an “applicants likely contributions to the intellectual and social life of the institution” (“Grutter v. Bollinger” 316). The underrepresentation of African-Americans, Hispanics, and Native Americans in college due to the historical discrimination against them is delineated by the admissions policy of Michigan Law School. Justice Thomas’s opinion in Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, “the use of race for the attainment of a diverse student body”, has set a legal precedence.
References: American Bar Association (2003). Grutter v. Bollinger. Retrieved 1 December 2012 from http://ezproxy.chc.edu:2063/hottopics/lnacademic/?verb=sf&sfi=AC07STJrnlsSrch Friedman, L. (2004). Public Opinion and Strict Scrutiny Equal Protection Review: Higher Education Affirmative Action and the Future of the Equal Protection Framework HarstoHaHartson, Hogan & (2003). Affirmative Action in Higher Education After Grutter v. Bollinger and Gratz v Supreme Court Observer (2003). Grutter v. Bollinger. Retrieved 1 December 2012 from http://www.supremeobserver.com/case-document/?doc=13169