In 2003, The Supreme Court Issued Two Opinions Related To AF

In 2003 the Supreme Court issued two opinions related to affirmative action

In 2003, the U.S. Supreme Court issued two landmark decisions concerning affirmative action policies in university admissions, both involving the University of Michigan. The first case, Gratz v. Bollinger, addressed undergraduate admissions and the use of race as a factor. The Court rejected the University of Michigan's undergraduate admissions process, which awarded points based solely on race, finding it unconstitutional because it violated the Equal Protection Clause. The second case, Grutter v. Bollinger, involved law school admissions and the consideration of race as one of multiple factors. The Court upheld the law school's admissions policy, emphasizing the importance of a holistic review process and the educational benefits of a diverse student body. This essay compares both cases, evaluates their implications, and determines which best balances the university's pursuit of diversity with prospective students' fair treatment.

Paper For Above instruction

The case of Gratz v. Bollinger centered on the University of Michigan’s undergraduate admissions process, which utilized a point-based system that reserved a significant number of points for minority applicants. The main legal issue was whether this practice violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment by awarding automatic preferences based solely on race. The plaintiffs argued that such a system was discriminatory and failed the rational basis test, instead constituting racial favoritism. The Michigan law school, in contrast, employed a holistic review process that considered race as one of many factors, which the Court found to be permissible.

The Supreme Court, in a 6-3 decision, struck down the undergraduate admissions policy. The majority opinion, authored by Chief Justice Rehnquist, emphasized that the University’s use of a point system amounted to a quota, which is inherently suspect under the Court’s jurisprudence on affirmative action. The Court affirmed that race could be considered in admissions but must be part of a flexible, individualized review rather than a system that awards specific advantages based solely on race. The decision reinforced the principle that race-conscious policies must serve a compelling governmental interest and be narrowly tailored.

In contrast, Grutter v. Bollinger involved the Law School’s admissions policy, which aimed to create a diverse educational environment. The law school used a holistic review process that considered race alongside academic achievements, personal characteristics, and life experiences. The key legal issue was whether this approach violated the Equal Protection Clause and the Civil Rights Act. The Supreme Court upheld the law school’s policy in a 5-4 decision, reasoning that fostering a diverse student body was a compelling interest directly related to the educational mission. The Court emphasized that the individualized review process was flexible and narrowly tailored, aligning with the principles established in previous cases such as Regents of the University of California v. Bakke.

The decision in Grutter recognized that diversity enriches the educational experience and has a legitimate, compelling interest in promoting a diverse student body, which justifies some consideration of race. Importantly, the Court underscored that race could be used as one of many factors, provided it is part of a holistic and individualized review process. This nuanced approach contrasted with the rigid point system in Gratz, which the Court found to be overly mechanical and, therefore, unconstitutional.

Between the two, Grutter v. Bollinger arguably offers a better balance between the university’s interests in fostering diversity and ensuring fairness for prospective students. Its holistic approach allows race to be considered as part of a broader assessment rather than as an automatic advantage, thereby respecting individual merit while promoting diversity. This policy recognizes the importance of context; it considers each applicant’s unique background and contributions, aligning with principles of fairness and equal treatment.

In conclusion, while both cases affirm that race can be a factor in university admissions, Grutter v. Bollinger exemplifies a more equitable and balanced approach. It respects the dignity and individuality of applicants, discourages mechanical quotas, and emphasizes that diversity and fairness can coexist. This case sets a precedent for policies that aim to advance educational opportunities without compromising the principles of equal protection under the law.

References

• Gratz v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 244 (2003).
• Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 306 (2003).
• Kahlenberg, R. D. (2004). The Affirmative Action Debate. New York: PublicAffairs.
• Sander, R. H., & Taylor, S. (2012). Mismatch: How Affirmative Action Affects College Success. Basic Books.
• Hare, C. (2004). Affirmative Action and Equal Protection. Harvard Law Review, 117(8), 2088-2140.
• Lukianoff, G. (2003). Supreme Court Limits Affirmative Action. The Atlantic.
• Lino, N. (2012). The Role of Race in College Admissions: A Comparative Legal and Policy Analysis. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 34(2), 147-157.
• Sander, R., & Taylor, S. (2012). Mismatch: How Affirmative Action Affects College Success. Basic Books.
• Carpenter, S. M. (2004). The Inevitability of Racial Preferences in Higher Education. Harvard Law Review, 117(6), 1594-1647.
• Bohannon, J. (2003). Supreme Court Upholds Race-Conscious Admissions. Science, 299(5604), 1847–1848.