What decided the Bakke case?

Asked by: Kory Pagac  |  Last update: June 26, 2022
Score: 4.8/5 (58 votes)

Bakke is a 1978 Supreme Court case which held that a university's admissions criteria which used race as a definite and exclusive basis for an admission decision violated the Equal Protection Clause

Equal Protection Clause
The Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause requires states to practice equal protection. Equal protection forces a state to govern impartially—not draw distinctions between individuals solely on differences that are irrelevant to a legitimate governmental objective.
https://www.law.cornell.edu › wex › equal_protection
of the Fourteenth Amendment and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

What caused the Bakke case?

Citing evidence that his grades and test scores surpassed those of many minority students who had been accepted for admission, Bakke charged that he had suffered unfair “reverse discrimination” on the basis of race, which he argued was contrary to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the equal protection clause of the U.S. ...

What was the Bakke decision and why was it so important?

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.

What did the Supreme Court decision in UC Davis v Bakke determine?

Bakke, 438 U.S. 265 (1978), was a landmark decision by the Supreme Court of the United States. It upheld affirmative action, allowing race to be one of several factors in college admission policy.

What led up to the Regents of University of California v Bakke?

Four of the justices contended that any racial quota system supported by government violated the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Justice Lewis F. Powell, Jr., agreed, casting the deciding vote ordering the medical school to admit Bakke.

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

44 related questions found

How did the decision in Regents of the University of California?

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.

What did the Supreme Court's decision in Regents of the University of California v Bakke do quizlet?

In Regents of University of California v. Bakke , the Supreme Court ruled that a university's use of racial quotas in its admissions process was unlawful, but a school's use of "affirmative action" to accept more outvoted candidates was constitutional in some circumstances. You just studied 8 terms!

What did the Supreme Court rule in the Bakke case quizlet?

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.

What was the significance of the Bakke decision and the more recent University of Michigan cases?

What was the significance of the Bakke decision and the University of Michigan cases? They forbade the use of racial quotas in school admissions, but allowed some consideration of race in admissions decisions. Slavery was prohibited by the Nineteenth Amendment of the U. S. Constitution.

Where is Allan Bakke now?

And it ordered the school to admit Bakke. Bakke entered that fall at 38. He was greeted by demonstrations, dogged by criticism and kept to himself. After graduating in 1982, he took his residency at the Mayo Clinic and since 1986 has worked as an anesthesiologist at the Olmsted Medical Group in Rochester, Minn.

Why did the Supreme Court agree with Bakke reverse discrimination claim?

The case had divided the Court: Four justices agreed with Bakke that the university's affirmative-action strategy violated Title VI because it put a cap on the number of white students who could get in. (Those justices did not take up the Fourteenth Amendment question.)

What's the irony of the equal protection claim submitted by Bakke?

Bakke called the decision "ironic" stating, "after several hundred years of class-based discrimination against Negroes, the Court is unwilling to hold that a class-based remedy for that discrimination is permissible."

What did the US Supreme Court say about the University of Michigan law school admissions policy Why?

The Supreme Court, in a 6-3 decision written by Chief Justice William Rehnquist, ruled that the University of Michigan's undergraduate admissions program was unconstitutional because it violated the Equal Protection Clause.

Why did affirmative action start?

Affirmative action was initiated by the administration of President Lyndon Johnson (1963–69) in order to improve opportunities for African Americans while civil rights legislation was dismantling the legal basis for discrimination.

What resulted from the Supreme Court's ruling Brown v Board of Education 1954?

On May 17, 1954, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Earl Warren delivered the unanimous ruling in the landmark civil rights case Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas. State-sanctioned segregation of public schools was a violation of the 14th amendment and was therefore unconstitutional.

What was the Supreme Court concerned about in its ruling in Miranda v Arizona 1966 )?

In the landmark supreme court case Miranda v. Arizona (1966), the Court held that if police do not inform people they arrest about certain constitutional rights, including their Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination, then their confessions may not be used as evidence at trial.

What did the Supreme Court decide in Korematsu versus U.S. regarding the internment of American citizens of Japanese ancestry living in the United States quizlet?

Korematsu asked the Supreme Court of the United States to hear his case. On December 18, 1944, a divided Supreme Court ruled, in a 6-3 decision, that the detention was a “military necessity” not based on race.

Which case outlawed the use of race as a factor in admission to law school quizlet?

The case of University of California Regents v.

Which Supreme Court ruling set the precedent for the right to privacy?

In the United States, the Supreme Court first recognized the right to privacy in Griswold v. Connecticut (1965).

What is the likely effect of the Court's ruling in the Bakke case?

According to the quote, what is the likely effect of the Court's ruling in the Bakke case? Colleges can consider race but cannot use strict racial quotas in admission practices.

Why did Grutter lose the lawsuit?

The University of Michigan appealed both cases, and a divided en banc panel of the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed Grutter's victory at the district court and held that the University was justified in using racial preferences to achieve diversity.

When did Michigan ban affirmative action?

African-Americans gained the most. It was a significant change at an institution where minority enrollment plunged after Michigan voters banned affirmative action in 2006.

Did Allan Bakke Graduate?

-- Allan Bakke, who won a landmark Supreme Court 'reverse discrimination' case, has graduated from the University of California medical school he fought for 10 years to enter, but he tried to make sure no one noticed.

Who was Allan Bakke?

Allan Bakke, a white California man who had twice unsuccessfully applied for admission to the medical school, filed suit against the university. Citing evidence that his grades and test scores surpassed those of many minority students who had been accepted for admission, Bakke charged that…

Who is Barbara Grutter?

Those of you who have taken constitutional law will recall (and those who have not will soon learn) that Barbara Grutter was the white plaintiff who challenged the University of Michigan Law School's use of race to favor minority applicants in the admissions process.