Grutter v. Bollinger

Thesis Statement The case of Grutter V. Bollinger was based on a racial decision by the University of Michigan Law School denying Barbara Grutter entrance. She had a good GPA and a good place on the LSAT, and she should have been allowed into the school without her race being considered. Introduction This was a United States Supreme Court case, in where Barbara Grutter applied for the University of Michigan Law School and was denied. This University

Case Summary: Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 306 (2003) involved a white Michigan resident named Barbara Grutter and the University of Michigan Law School. Grutter was frustrated by her rejection from the Law School, claiming that the University’s decision was due to a discriminatory admission policy which sought to enroll greater amounts of underrepresented minority students. Grutter believed that white candidates possessed a disadvantage due to this policy and she sued the university. According

bodies, and our courts have been involved in many aspects of testing assessment. Courts have been grappling with the role of diversity in criteria for admission to colleges, universities, and professional schools (Cohen, 2013). In the case of Grutter v. Bollinger (2002) was a highly divided decision, the U.S. Supreme Court approved the use of race in admission decisions on a time-limited basis to further the educational benefits that flow from a diverse

Grutter v. Bollinger Grutter v. Bollinger was a very influential case for race relations in public colleges across America. The case involved Barbara Grutter and her dispute with the University of Michigan. She was denied acceptance to the university despite her above average LSAT scores and GPA. However, the university claimed the school looks at the overall character of the applicant and “family hardships, travel, language fluency, community service, etc” ("Grutter v. Bollinger"). Throughout the

The Supreme Court, in Grutter v. Bollinger, skirts around the issue of violating the Equal Protection Clause through affirmative action by stating that the goal of affirmative action is not about repaying for the United States’ history toward racial minorities, but instead about achieving classroom diversity. While the Supreme Court argues that classroom diversity is beneficial in a learning environment, this claim is unproven. Had the court stated outright that the goal of an affirmative action

Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 306 (2003) FACTS: A Michigan resident was denied admission to the University of Michigan Law school, even though she had a 3.8 GPA and a score of 161 on the LSAT. Barbara Grutter sued the school alleging that they had discriminated against her based on her race, which would be in violation of her constitutional rights. The University of Michigan Law School argued that there is a state interest to not have a “critical mass” of students of a given race; so that minorities

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

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

and the impacts on society the utilization of race creates. With such pending questions on fairness and of the constitutionality of affirmative action policies two major Supreme Court cases have arisen, University of California Regents v. Bakke and Grutter v. Bollinger, both impacting university admissions policies throughout the country and setting precedent in following rulings. Following the two rulings of these cases, I argue that affirmative action and the utilization of

Protection Clause (EPC) Jurisprudence, nor any guidance to lower courts how to apply Grutter and determine whether a race-based admissions program is consistent with the Fourteenth Amendment. Danielle Holley-Walker, in her article published in winter of 2014, explores the impact Fisher III has on race-conscious admissions programs, and argues that Fisher III enhances the strict scrutiny analysis, especially when compared to Grutter. Moreover, she argues “Justice Ginsburg’s dissent meaningfully highlights