Gratz v. Bollinger

Name, Legal Citation, and Level of Court Gratz Et Al. V. Bollinger Et Al., 539 US 244 (2003). The case was originally heard in the Federal District Court, and finally decided in the Rehnquist Court. Case Brief (3,4,5) Petitioner, Jennifer Gratz, who is Caucasian Michigan resident, applied for admission for the fall 1995 semester, to the University of Michigan’s College of Literature, Science, and the Arts (LSA) as residents of the State of Michigan. Gratz was told that, despite being very much qualified

The cases of Gratz/Grutter v. Bollinger are two cases alleging that the University of Michigan and the University of Michigan Law School discriminated against students who applied for admission because of their race(Tuttle, Kevin).The university of michigan receives a high volume of applicants each year(Tuttle, Kevin).to help the admissions decisions the university has a point system which is out of 100 points(O’Connor).a student that is from an underrepresented group automatically receives 20

The case of Gratz/Grutter V. Bollinger is actually two cases, but not only are they about the same thing they are against the same school. It started with Gratz, a young white woman that applied to the university of Michigan, despite having extremely high marks for her grades and recommendations from teachers she was denied admission due to a spot already being filled by an “underrepresented minority”. In fact with her credentials and grades she had less than a 10% chance of getting accepted but

Race-based affirmative action has been challenged by a great deal of objection during the course of it duration. According to its opponents, Affirmative action proves to be inconsistent. Affirmative action based on race increases race consciousness instead of supporting color-blind justice. By giving people special consideration to ensure equality, it contributes to inequality. The constitution of the United States calls for equal treatment, therefore, allowing racial consideration poses a contradiction

Since the election of President Barack Obama, many people have adopted the idea that the nation has progressed and there are even some people who trust that it is now time to halt school, housing, and employment affirmative action policies. Sadly though, many people are unaware of the fact that there has been an upsurge in hate crimes and racial profiling. Because of this, there is a chasm between black and white success in schools, career prospects, housing, and quality of health care (Sadler 1140-1141)

Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, it did so on the basis that the University of Michigan scheme itself was too broad and thus discriminatory on its face; it did not strike down the notion of affirmative action in any way (Gratz v. Bollinger, 2003). In fact, the same day this ruling came down, the Supreme Court issued another ruling that upheld the University of Michigan Law

In Fisher v Texas, the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of special admissions programs; but this could only be done under strict judicial scrutiny, and with narrowly tailored provisions. Two separate questions stem from this: What does “narrowly tailoring” mean in light of the 14th Amendment? And how can other universities implement admission standards that are constitutionally permissible? Short Answer Grutter and Gratz established that race could be a factor in the admissions process

programs such as affirmative action. It should instead adopt a new system based on many more factors than a person’s ethnic background. Decades ago the issue was over creating equal opportunities for all people regardless of ethnic background. The Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka was a landmark case for the civil rights movement. It solidified the rights of the minority to receive the same access to education as the white student. In modern society

factor as long as there are no quotas (Aguirre Jr. & Martinez, 2003). There are two recent lawsuits from 2003 that brought to the forefront college admissions using race; these include Grutter v. Bollinger and Gratz v. Bollinger (Bowman, 2013). Both cases involve the University of Michigan. In Grutter v. Bollinger, the court sided with the university stating that their admissions office can continue to use race-based initiatives in fostering an education benefit to the students (Bowman, 2013).

factor—it’s the one hairy, delicate topic that people tiptoe around—and that’s the race factor. Everyone cringes when the word “race” begins floating around. So, the Supreme Court gave universities a blueprint for creating admissions standards: Grutter v Bollinger