Grutter v. Bollinger:  The Precedents

Here are a list of precedents for the case.
 
Univ. of California Regents v. Bakke (1978): On one point the Court ruled 5-4 that state universities may not set aside a fixed quota of seats in each class for minority members, denying white applicants the opportunity to compete for those places. On a second point the Court ruled 5-4 that admissions officers do not violate the equal protection guarantee when they consider race as one of many factors that determine which applicant is accepted and which rejected.

Civil Rights Act of 1964: Title VI of the Act (Sect.601) states that, "No person in the United States shall, on the ground of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance."

Adarand Constructors, Inc. v. Pena (1995): All racial classifications reviewable under the Equal Protection Clause must be strictly scrutinized. Any person of whatever race has the right to demand that any governmental actor subject to the Constitution justify any racial classification subjecting that person to unequal treatment under the strictest of judicial scrutiny.

Johnson v. Transportation Agency, Santa Clara County (1987): The Court upheld a program in which gender was but one of numerous factors taken into account in arriving at a decision because no persons are automatcially excluded from consideration: all are able to have their qualifications weighed against those of other applicants.

Richmond v. Croson (1989): The Court held that racial balance is not to be achieved for its own sake.

Wygant v. Jackson Board of Ed. (1986): The Court ruled that narrow tailoring does not require exhaustion of every conceivable race-neutral alternative or mandate that a university choose between maintaining a reputation for excellence or fulfilling a commitment to provide educational opportunities to members of all racial groups.

Sweat v. PPainter (1950): The Court recognized that because universities, particularly law schools, represent the training ground for a large number of the Nation's leaders, the path to leadership must be visibly open to talented and qualified individuals of every race and ethnicity.


Back