Grutter V. Bollinger Research Paper 2
Barbara Grutter (plaintiff) which is a resident of Michigan who was denied admissions into the University of Michigan Law School. Lee Bollinger (defendant) was president of the University of Michigan. Grutter filed this suit because the University had discriminated against the basis of race. Supreme Court ruled that the use of affirmative action in school admissions is constitutional if it treats race as some factor. Is affirmative action still necessary for guaranteeing equal access to educational opportunities at elite universities and graduate schools? Should admissions decisions be based solely on academic criteria and merit?
Key Words: affirmative action, Grutter V. Bollinger, and diversity.
Grutter V. Bollinger Research Paper 3
Affirmative Action in Education
Affirmative action was formed more than fifty years ago. …show more content…
President Johnson frames the concept of affirmative action by this quote: "You do not wipe away the scars of centuries by saying: 'now, you are free to go where you want, do as you desire, and choose the leaders you please.' You do not take a man who for years has been hobbled by chains, liberate him, bring him to the starting line of a race, saying, 'you are free to compete with all the others,' and still justly believe you have been completely fair . . . This is the next and more profound stage of the battle for civil rights. We seek not just freedom but opportunity—not just legal equity but human ability—not just equality as a right and a theory, but equality as a fact and as a result." According to Kristina Crawley and Tony Magart, "Affirmative action is a program built on racial discrimination, all the while claiming to fight it". “In the case Grutter v. Bollinger (2003), the Supreme Court ruled that the use of affirmative action in school admission is
Click here to unlock this and over one million essaysShow More
Notаbly absent from the opinion, as it was in Plessy, is any citаtion to a Supreme Court cаse that considered whether the prаctice of segregating schools was a violation of the Fourteenth Аmendment. It was an open question for the Court. The Court аdmitted that the precedent to which it cited involved discriminаtion between whites and blacks rаther thаn other rаces. However, the Court found no аppreciable difference here—"the decision is within the discretion of the state in regulating its public schools, and does not conflict with the Fourteenth Аmendment."
SUMMARY In this landmark case Allan Bakke, a white applicant to the University of California, Davis Medical School, sued claiming his denial of admission on racial grounds was a violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution. The standing rule at the time was that race may be a factor in determining admission to educational institutions; however it cannot be the sole determining factor. FACTS OF THE CASE The University of California, Davis Medical School had been reserving 16 spots in each class out of 100 for disadvantaged minorities.
The U.S. Supreme Court Case Regents of the University of California v. Allan Bakke was officially decided June 28, 1978. The case addressed the issue of use of affirmative action in university admissions processes. Affirmative action, also referred to as positive discrimination, was a result of the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s, and was intended to ensure equal entry to educational institutions or employment entities to certain groups that “have historically suffered invidious discrimination” (Janda et al., 477). However, sometimes this method causes discrimination of other groups, through establishment of racial quotas. University of California employed the process of affirmative action and instituted racial quotas in its admissions
Ira Katznelson is the author of When Affirmative Action Was White, a historical analysis of the history of affirmative action and racial inequality in the United States of America. Katznelson takes a definitive approach to the history of legislation and inequalities and prepares the reader initially with his title. Katznelson’s argumentative position and approach to the title of his book makes the reader question about affirmative action for white Americans, but in reality what Katznelson means by his title, When Affirmative Action Was White, is more based on the social programs and federal grant opportunities that were created and provided to Americans during the Roosevelt and Truman administration. Katznelson argument encompasses historical
The Supreme Court made a mistake when they decided with the University of Texas; no college should take in race as a factor when selecting applications of students. In 2007, two female high school students applied to the University of Texas; one of the girls being Miss Abigail N. Fisher. Abigail was a caucasian, in the top 12% of her school at Stephen Austin High School, but she was denied by the University of Texas along with a friend of her’s. However,
In Regents of University of California v. Bakke (1978), the Supreme Court ruled that a university 's use of racial "quotas" in its admissions process was unconstitutional, but a school 's use of "affirmative action" to accept more minority applicants was constitutional in some circumstances. " The college was asked to at least consider blacks in the admittance of college and they were asked to not use quotas in the admission
The continued neoliberalism thinking is consistent with this decision. Although the overall goal was to desegregate schools that enrolled mostly white students, the Fordice decision also affected higher education and even led to the desegregation of primarily black colleges. This litigation is still
Overall, President Johnson is highly regarded as a key figure in implementing civil liberties, opportunities, and programs designed to hopefully bring the African American community out of generational poverty. Donald Allen would agree with President Johnson’s viewpoint on the importance of equal rights and fighting the wrongs of discrimination. Moreover, this agreed viewpoint is discussed when Allen illustrates the importance of our Bill of Rights through the statement “That is why a Bill of Rights was added to the U.S. Constitution and why the First Amendment comes first in that list of liberties”. (Ball, Dagger, O’Neill, p. 158, 2020) Both Allen and Johnson agree all US citizens regardless of race are endowed with the rights given in our Constitution.
No one should be denied from a college because they can't meet the colleges diversity quota. That is why affirmative action should instead be based on place and not race which will be more effective at creating diversity on the campus and not just in physical characteristics but in ideas and how people formulate them. The author makes a good argument on this topic by appealing to pathos, logos and ethos. In this text the author at several points appeals to pathos to support the argument of place over race.
Throughout history, white males were given better education than other races and minorities. in addition, until 1955 whites had priority seating on busses and trains, blacks were forced to give up their seats if need be. Throughout history, whites have oppressed minority groups for self gain. Today, nothing of this extent is still active, but racism and oppression still exists. Johnson believes that we are all created equal and develop into who we are.
Board of Education is a very important landmark case. This case addressed the constitutionality of segregation in public schools back in the early 1950s. When the case was heard in a U.S. District Court a three-judge panel ruled in favor of the school boards. The plaintiffs then appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. The Supreme Court went through all its procedures and eventually decided that “Separate educational facilities are inherently unequal” ().
At least four Supreme Court justices believe that affirmative action is unconstitutional. Chief Justice John Roberts has said that “the way to stop discriminating on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race”. This viewpoint offers no differentiation between “race consciousness” and “racism”, but is a quite common opinion. This sort of viewpoint is what may drive America towards class-based rather than race-based affirmative action. Because of the disparities in income and wealth, minorities are as likely as whites to benefit under a class-based policy.
Affirmative action has become obsolete in today’s society. Affirmative action is an active effort to improve the employment or educational opportunities of members of minority groups and women; also: a similar effort to promote the rights or progress of other disadvantaged persons (Merriam-Webster, 2011). Today’s affirmative action will demoralize the very concepts that the policy was implemented to uphold: those of equality for all people regardless of color and discrimination. This policy supports racial multiplicity at the price of distinction, impartiality and experience; it also follows the line of reverse discrimination and sexual bias against white men (Reyna, Tucker, Korfmacher, & Henry, 2005).
Throughout many of the affirmative action legal cases, one of the main arguments from proponents is that it is necessary in order to right the wrongs of past racial discrimination. Some say that affirmative action is justified because even though white applicants may be more qualified, this is only because they did not face the same hardships as their minority counterparts (Rachels, Ethics, 1973). Many argue if we do not integrate disadvantaged minorities into mainstream social institutions, they will continue to suffer the discrimination that has plagued our country for centuries and that this is detrimental to not only the minorities but also society as a whole (Anderson, 2002, 1270–71). However, the debate has recently shifted to the benefits of diversity in the classroom which the Supreme Court has affirmed as being a positive thing