Eleanor Finch
Affirmative action has been the subject of numerous court cases, often contested on constitutional grounds. In 1978, the Supreme Court first upheld race-conscious admissions in Regents of the University of California v. Bakke. In 2003, academic affirmative action programs were challenged in Gratz v. Bollinger and Grutter v. Bollinger, where the Court clarified that admission programs that include race as a factor can be constitutional if the policy is narrowly tailored and does not create a race-based preference. In 2016, the Supreme Court found in favor of the University of Texas at Austin in Fisher v. University of Texas, upholding the university's race-conscious admissions practices. However, in 2023, the Supreme Court's decision in SFFA v. Harvard and SFFA v. UNC effectively eliminated the use of affirmative action in college admissions, marking a significant shift in established equal protection law.
| Characteristics | Values |
|---|---|
| Court | United States Supreme Court |
| Year | 2023 |
| Case | Students for Fair Admissions v. President and Fellows of Harvard College (SFFA v. Harvard) |
| Students for Fair Admissions v. University of North Carolina (SFFA v. UNC) | |
| Gratz v. Bollinger | |
| Grutter v. Bollinger | |
| Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action | |
| Fisher v. University of Texas | |
| Regents of the University of California v. Bakke | |
| Brown v. Board of Education | |
| Affirmative Action Type | Race-based |
| Race-neutral | |
| Affirmative Action Outcome | Banned in higher education admissions |
| Still allowed in employment and other areas |
Explore related products
What You'll Learn
- The Supreme Court upheld affirmative action in Grutter v. Bollinger
- Affirmative action was deemed constitutional in Fisher v. University of Texas
- Regents of the University of California v. Bakke upheld affirmative action
- The University of Texas at Austin's affirmative action policies were upheld
- The Supreme Court upheld a ban on affirmative action in Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action
The Supreme Court upheld affirmative action in Grutter v. Bollinger
In Grutter v. Bollinger, the Supreme Court of the United States upheld affirmative action in student admissions. The case concerned the University of Michigan Law School's admissions policy, which gave applicants from certain racial minority groups an advantage over those from other racial groups. Barbara Grutter, a white Michigan resident, filed a lawsuit challenging this policy after being denied admission to the law school in 1996. She alleged that the policy constituted discrimination on the basis of race, violating the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and 42 U.S.C. § 1981.
The Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision announced on June 23, 2003, upheld the University's admissions policy. The Court held that a student admissions process that favors "underrepresented minority groups" did not violate the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause as long as it considered other factors on an individual basis for every applicant. This decision built upon the Court's previous ruling in Regents of the University of California v. Bakke (1978), which allowed race to be considered in admissions but prohibited racial quotas.
In Grutter v. Bollinger, the Court clarified that race-conscious admissions policies must be limited in time. Justice O'Connor wrote in her majority opinion that "the Court expects that 25 years from now, the use of racial preferences will no longer be necessary." However, Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer disagreed with the notion that affirmative action would become unnecessary within that timeframe. Meanwhile, Chief Justice William Rehnquist, joined by three other justices, dissented, arguing that the University's admissions system was an unconstitutional quota system.
The Supreme Court's decision in Grutter v. Bollinger was significant, influencing subsequent debates and court cases regarding affirmative action in higher education. However, in June 2023, the Supreme Court effectively overruled Grutter v. Bollinger in the cases of Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard and Students for Fair Admissions v. University of North Carolina. The Court ruled that affirmative action in student admissions violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Foundations of Freedom: Guarding Tyranny with the Constitution
You may want to see also
Affirmative action was deemed constitutional in Fisher v. University of Texas
Affirmative action has been the subject of numerous court cases in the United States, often contested on constitutional grounds. In 2023, the Supreme Court ended affirmative action in higher education, ruling that universities could not consider race in their admissions decisions. This decision was based on the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, which prohibits state actors from making distinctions in law based on race or color.
However, prior to this, affirmative action programs had been deemed constitutional in several cases. One notable example is Fisher v. University of Texas, where the Supreme Court upheld the University of Texas's race-conscious admissions practices. The case was first heard in 2012, and the Court rendered an ambiguous ruling in 2013, sending the case back to the lower court and stipulating that the university must demonstrate that it could not achieve diversity through non-race sensitive means. In 2014, the US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit concluded that the University of Texas maintained a "holistic" approach to affirmative action and could continue the practice.
The case was appealed again, and in 2016, the Supreme Court found in favor of the University of Texas, with Justice Kennedy finding that the university's affirmative action policies were constitutional, despite the requirement of strict scrutiny. This decision was based on the recognition that affirmative action was created to address systemic racial discrimination and oppression and to level the playing field for underrepresented students.
While the Fisher v. University of Texas case upheld affirmative action programs, it is important to note that there have been other cases, such as Gratz v. Bollinger and Grutter v. Bollinger, where the constitutionality of affirmative action was also debated. In these cases, the Court clarified that admission programs that include race as a factor can be constitutional if the policy is narrowly tailored and does not create an automatic preference based on race.
The debate around affirmative action in the United States is complex, and while the practice was partially upheld in some cases, it was also met with opposition and challenges, as seen in the ban on affirmative action in Michigan and the Trump administration's support for "race-neutral alternatives" in admissions.
Sub-Tier Vendors: Conflict of Interest?
You may want to see also
Regents of the University of California v. Bakke upheld affirmative action
In 1978, the landmark case of Regents of the University of California v. Bakke addressed the constitutionality of affirmative action programs in college admissions. The case centred around Allan Bakke, who claimed that the University of California Medical School at Davis had denied him admission due to his race, in violation of the Federal and California Constitutions and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
The University of California operated two admissions programs: a regular admissions program and a special admissions program. Bakke, a white male applicant, was denied admission despite meeting the requirements of the regular admissions program. He alleged that the special admissions program, which set aside a certain number of places for minority students, unfairly discriminated against him based on his race.
The California Supreme Court initially ruled in Bakke's favour, ordering the university to admit him. The University of California appealed this decision, leading to the landmark Supreme Court case.
The Supreme Court's decision in Regents of the University of California v. Bakke upheld affirmative action while curbing the use of strict racial quotas. Justice Powell, delivering the Court's judgment, opined that affirmative action in general was permissible under the Constitution and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The Court recognised the compelling state interest in achieving diversity in the classroom. However, the Court also held that the specific program at UC Davis went too far by utilising fixed quotas, which were deemed unnecessary to achieve the goal of a diverse student body.
The ruling in Regents of the University of California v. Bakke set a precedent for affirmative action in college admissions. It affirmed that race could be considered as one of several factors in admissions decisions, provided it was not the sole or determining factor. This decision shaped subsequent debates and legal challenges surrounding affirmative action, with some states explicitly prohibiting it and others allowing it with certain limitations.
While the Regents of the University of California v. Bakke case upheld affirmative action, subsequent cases, such as Gratz v. Bollinger and Grutter v. Bollinger in 2003, further clarified and shaped the legal landscape of affirmative action in higher education. The Supreme Court, in these cases, emphasised that admissions programs considering race must be narrowly tailored and not create automatic preferences based on race. Despite these rulings, the debate over affirmative action in college admissions has persisted, with ongoing legal challenges and varying state-level approaches.
The Constitution: Logic or Flexible Interpretation?
You may want to see also
Explore related products
$18 $14.99
The University of Texas at Austin's affirmative action policies were upheld
Affirmative action has been the subject of numerous court cases in the United States, often being contested on constitutional grounds. The University of Texas at Austin's affirmative action policies were upheld by the Supreme Court in 2016, in the case of Fisher v. University of Texas. The Court found that the university's affirmative action policies were constitutional, despite the requirement for strict scrutiny of race-based classifications. This case was a continuation of the debate over affirmative action that began with Gratz v. Bollinger and Grutter v. Bollinger in 2003, which clarified that admission programs could include race as a factor as long as it was narrowly tailored and did not create automatic preferences.
The University of Texas at Austin's affirmative action policy was challenged by anti-civil rights activist Edward Blum, who argued that the university's race-conscious admissions practices were discriminatory. The Supreme Court, however, upheld the university's policy, finding that it maintained a holistic approach to affirmative action and could continue the practice. This decision was based on the understanding that affirmative action was created to address systemic racial discrimination and oppression and to level the playing field for underrepresented students.
The University of Texas at Austin's victory in this case was significant, as it reinforced the understanding that affirmative action is about more than just barring racial discrimination. It recognised the importance of diversity in exposing students to new ideas and ways of thinking, preparing them for a diverse society, and increasing understanding and respect across differences. This decision also upheld the principle that universities may use race as part of an admissions process, as long as fixed quotas are not used.
Despite this victory for affirmative action, it is important to note that there have been setbacks for this practice in other cases. For example, in 2023, the Supreme Court ended affirmative action in higher education with its decision in SFFA v. Harvard and SFFA v. UNC, eliminating the use of affirmative action in college admissions. Additionally, some states, such as California, Michigan, and Nebraska, have specifically prohibited affirmative action through propositions and initiatives.
Overall, the University of Texas at Austin's victory in Fisher v. University of Texas was a significant moment in the ongoing debate over affirmative action in the United States, highlighting the complex nature of this issue and the importance of ensuring equal opportunities for all.
The New York Constitution: Bills of Attainder?
You may want to see also
The Supreme Court upheld a ban on affirmative action in Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action
Affirmative action has been the subject of numerous court cases in the United States, where it is often contested on constitutional grounds. In Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action, the Supreme Court upheld a ban on affirmative action. This case arose after voters in Michigan passed Proposal 2, a statewide referendum amending the Michigan Constitution to ban affirmative action programs in public employment, education, and contracting. The proposal prohibited preferential treatment based on race, gender, colour, ethnicity, or national origin.
The Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action, an interest group, sued the state, arguing that the proposal violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The District Court initially found in favour of Michigan, upholding Proposal 2. However, the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit reversed this decision, concluding that the proposal was unconstitutional.
The case was then appealed to the Supreme Court, which agreed to hear it in 2013. On April 22, 2014, the Supreme Court, in a 6-2 decision, ruled that the amendment was constitutional and did not violate the Equal Protection Clause. The Court upheld the ban on affirmative action, stating that there was no authority to set aside Michigan laws that gave voters the power to decide on racial preferences in governmental decisions, particularly in school contexts.
The Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action case is significant as it showcases the ongoing debate surrounding affirmative action in the United States. While some states, like Michigan, California, Washington, and Nebraska, have banned affirmative action, other cases, such as Grutter v. Bollinger, have upheld the constitutionality of affirmative action programs in academic admissions. The Supreme Court's decision in Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action highlights the Court's interpretation of the Equal Protection Clause and its impact on affirmative action policies in public institutions.
It is worth noting that the Schuette case specifically addressed affirmative action in the context of public institutions in Michigan. The impact of this decision on affirmative action policies in other states or private institutions may vary, and future legal challenges or legislative changes could further shape the landscape of affirmative action in the United States.
Christian Signers of the Constitution: How Many?
You may want to see also
Frequently asked questions
Regents of the University of California v. Bakke in 1978.
The Supreme Court upheld the respondent's medical school affirmative action program.
The case remedied two conditions: a lack of doctors of colour caused by de jure segregation and the lack of healthcare professionals serving communities of colour.
Affirmative action was created to level the playing field by neutralising the effects of years of systemic racial discrimination and oppression.
Some other notable cases include Brown v. Board of Education, Gratz v. Bollinger, Grutter v. Bollinger, Fisher v. University of Texas, and SFFA v. Harvard and SFFA v. UNC.
