Grutter v. Bollinger
Published on Nov 18, 2015
No Description
MORE DECKS TO EXPLORE
7 Strategies to Write a Speech with Ease
84598 views
10 ways
45169 views
TXLA Wrap-up 2015
9449 views
What is Creativity
67825 views
What is Media Literacy Today?
25802 views
WHY WORK WITH ME?
20238 views
PRESENTATION OUTLINE
Grutter v. Bollinger
-RACE AS A FACTOR IN ADMISSIONS BY MICKEY BRATTON& MADELINE RICHIE
BARBARA GRUTTER, A WHITE RESIDENT APPLIED TO LAW SCHOOL AT THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN in 1996.
SHE HAD A 3.8 GPA AND A 161 LSAT SCORE BUT WAS REJECTED DUE TO RACE.
IN DECEMBER 1997, GRUTTER FILED SUIT THAT RESPONDENTS DISCRIMINATED AGAINST HER.
THe law school ranks among the nation's top law schools.
IT RECEIVES 3,500 APPLICATIONS EACH YEAR FOR A CLASS OF AROUND 350 STUDENTS.
THE LAW SCHOOL SEEKS TO "ADMIT A GROUP OF STUDENTS WHO
INDIVIDUALLY AND COLLECTIVELY ARE THE MOST CAPABLE."
MORE BROADLY, THE LAW SCHOOL SEEKS "A MIX OF STUDENTS WITH varying
BACKGROUNDS & EXPERIENCES WHO WILL RESPECT AND LEARN FROM EACH OTHER."
THE POLICY ASPIRES TO "ACHIEVE THAT DIVERSITY WHICH HAS THE POTENTIAL to enrich everyone's
EDUCATION & THUS MAKE A LAW SCHOOL CLASS STRONGER THAN THE SUM OF ITS PARTS."
THE POLICY DOES NOT RESTRICT THE TYPES OF DIVERSITY CONTRIBUTIONS ELIGIBLE FOR "substantial weight"
IN THE ADMISSIONS PROCESS, BUT INSTEAD RECOGNIZES "MANY POSSIBLE BASES FOR DIVERSITY ADMISSIONS."
The policy does, however, reaffirm the law school's longstanding commitment
TO "ONE PARTICULAR TYPE OF DIVERSITY" THAT IS "RACIAL AND ETHNIC DIVERSITY."
BY ENROLLING A "CRITICAL MASS" OF MINORITY students," the law school seeks to "ensure
THEIR ABILITY TO MAKE UNIQUE CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE CHARACTER OF THE LAW SCHOOL."
FOCUSING ON STUDENTS' ACADEMIC ABILITY COUPLED WITH A FLEXIBLE ASSESSMENT
OF THEIR TALENTS, EXPERIENCES, & POTENTIAL, THE POLICY REQUIRE ADMISSIONS OFFICIALS.
THEY EVALUATE EACH APPLICANT BASED ON ALL THE INFORMATION AVAILABLE IN THE FILE, including a
PERSONAL STATEMENT, LETTERS OF RECOMMENDATION, AN ESSAY, DIVERSITY, & a GPA & LSAT SCORE.
ADDITIONALLY, OFFICIALS MUST LOOK BEYOND GRADES & SCORES
to so-called "soft variables,"such as...
recommenders' enthusiasm,
the quality of the undergraduate institution,
THE APPLICANT'S ESSAY,
and the areas and difficulty of undergraduate course selection.
The policy does not define diversity solely in terms of racial & ethnic status
& DOESN'T RESTRICT THE TYPES OF DIVERSITY CONTRIBUTIONS ELIGIBLE FOR "SUBSTANTIAL WEIGHT".
It does reaffirm the law school's commitment to diversity with speciAL REFERENCES
TO THE INCLUSION OF AFRICAN-AMERICAN, HISPANIC, & NATIVE-AMERICAN STUDENTS
WHO OTHERWISE MIGHT NOT BE REPRESENTED IN THE STUDENT BODY IN MEANINGFUL NUMBERS.
THE DISTRICT COURT FOUND THE LAW SCHOOL'S USE OF RACE AS AN ADMISSION FACTOR UNLAWFUL.
THE RESULTS LEADING UP TO IT
was that the district court appealed it.
JUSTICE POWELL'S OPINION IN BAKKE WAS BINDING PRECEDENT ESTABLISHING DIVERSITY AS A COMPELLING
STATE INTEREST, & THAT THE LAW SCHOOL'S USE OF RACE WAS NARROWLY TAILORED BECAUSE..
RACE WAS MERELY A "POTENTIAL 'PLUS FACTOR".
RACE WAS MERELY A "POTENTIAL 'PLUS FACTOR".
The Court's majority ruling, authored by Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, held that the United States Constitution
does not prohibit the law school's narrowly tailored use of race in admissions decisions..
to further a compelling interest in obtaining the educational benefits that flow from a diverse student body."
THE COURT EXPECTS THAT 25 YEARS FROM NOW, THE USE OF RACIAL PREFERENCES WILL
NO LONGER BE NECESSARY TO FURTHER THE INTEREST APPROVED TODAY.
The Supreme Court ruling was 5-4 in favor
of the university that it didn't violate her rights,
