Regents of University of California v. Bakke Case Brief Summary | Law Case Explained

Summary

The case of Allan Bakke v. the University of California, Davis, became a landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision on affirmative action. Bakke, a qualified applicant, was rejected twice while less qualified minority candidates were admitted under a special program. The Court ruled that racial quotas in admissions violated the Equal Protection Clause, but race could still be considered as one factor. The decision sparked a nationwide debate on the role of race in higher education, laying the foundation for future rulings on affirmative action.

Takeaways

• 😀 Allan Bakke's case became a landmark Supreme Court decision about affirmative action in higher education.
• 😀 Bakke was denied admission to UC Davis Medical School despite strong qualifications, due to the school's racial quota system for minority students.
• 😀 The University of California, Davis Medical School had a separate admissions program for minority and economically disadvantaged students.
• 😀 Bakke, as a white male, was not eligible for the special program, even though students with lower test scores were accepted through it.
• 😀 Bakke filed a lawsuit arguing that the special admissions program violated the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act.
• 😀 The Supreme Court ruled that universities can use race in admissions, but racial quotas are unconstitutional.
• 😀 Justice Powell, writing the opinion, argued that racial classifications must serve a compelling state interest and be the least restrictive means to achieve it.
• 😀 The Court found that the UC Davis program's use of racial quotas did not meet the strict scrutiny test, as it wasn't the least restrictive way to promote diversity.
• 😀 Powell agreed that promoting diversity was a compelling interest but rejected race-based quotas as discriminatory for their own sake.
• 😀 The decision set a precedent that would be revisited in later cases, such as *Grutter v. Bollinger*, where affirmative action policies continued to evolve.

Q & A

What was Allan Bakke's main reason for filing a lawsuit against the University of California, Davis Medical School?

Allan Bakke filed a lawsuit because he was denied admission to the medical school despite having higher qualifications than some of the minority applicants admitted through the school's special admissions program, which reserved 16 seats for minority students.

What was the structure of the University of California, Davis Medical School's admissions process?

The medical school had two separate admissions programs: a general program for most applicants and a special program for minority and economically disadvantaged students. There were 84 seats available through the general admissions pool and 16 reserved for minority applicants in the special program.

Why was Bakke not eligible for the special admissions program?

Bakke was not eligible for the special admissions program because he was a white male from an average economic background, and the program was specifically designed for minority and economically disadvantaged students.

What legal arguments did Bakke make in his lawsuit?

Bakke argued that the special admissions program violated the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits racial discrimination by institutions receiving federal funding.

What was the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in the Bakke case?

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that while universities can consider race in admissions to promote diversity, the University of California’s racial quota system was unconstitutional. The Court struck down the quota system but allowed for race to be used as one factor in the admissions process under strict scrutiny.

What is 'strict scrutiny' in legal terms, and how did it apply to the Bakke case?

Strict scrutiny is the highest standard of judicial review, requiring that any racial classification must serve a compelling state interest and be the least restrictive means of achieving that interest. In the Bakke case, the Court applied strict scrutiny to evaluate the university's special admissions program.

What did Justice Powell conclude about the University of California’s affirmative action program?

Justice Powell concluded that although promoting diversity was a compelling state interest, the University of California’s racial quota system was unconstitutional because it was not the least restrictive means to achieve diversity and was overly rigid.

What did Justice Brennan argue in his concurrence and dissenting opinion?

Justice Brennan argued that programs using racial classifications to remedy past discrimination served a compelling state interest and should be upheld. He believed such programs were constitutional if they aimed to address systemic discrimination.

What was the role of the 14th Amendment and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act in the Bakke case?

The 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act were central to Bakke's argument. He contended that the special admissions program violated these laws by discriminating against him based on race, and that such discrimination was unlawful under both the Constitution and federal law.

What was the lasting impact of the Bakke case on affirmative action policies?

The Bakke case had a significant impact by invalidating the use of racial quotas in admissions while still allowing race to be considered as one factor in the process to promote diversity. The case set the stage for future rulings on affirmative action, such as *Grutter v. Bollinger*, which further clarified the use of race in admissions.