What is the significance of Grutter v Bollinger?

Bollinger, a case decided by the United States Supreme Court on June 23, 2003, upheld the affirmative action admissions policy of the University of Michigan Law School. The decision permitted the use of racial preference in student admissions to promote student diversity.

What was the topic of the Grutter and Gratz v Bollinger case?

Grutter v. Bollinger and Gratz v. Bollinger (2003) | PBS. In twin cases involving affirmative action policies at the University of Michigan, the Court upheld the use of race as an admissions factor to the Law School, but struck an undergraduate admissions policy that awarded “points” to minority applicants.

Who won the case of Grutter v Bollinger?

5–4 decision In a 5-4 opinion delivered by Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, the Court held that the Equal Protection Clause 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.

What amendment did Grutter v Bollinger violate?

Grutter alleged that the policy constituted discrimination on the basis of race in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and 42 U.S.C. § 1981. Grutter named Lee Bollinger, President of the University of Michigan at the time, as the defendant.

What did the Grutter opinion say?

The Court held that a student admissions process that favors “underrepresented minority groups” does not violate the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause so long as it takes into account other factors evaluated on an individual basis for every applicant.

What was the ruling in the Michigan case of Grutter v Bollinger quizlet?

Bollinger was a ruling that stated adding points due to race in the university admission point system was unconstitutional. The ruling was against the University of Michigan’s undergraduate admission.

What is the difference between Grutter v Bollinger and Gratz v Bollinger?

Question: What is the difference between the Gratz case and the Grutter case? Answer: Gratz v. Bollinger challenged the undergraduate admissions system at UM’s College of Literature, the Arts and Sciences (“LSA”); Grutter v. Bollinger challenged the UM Law School admissions system.

When did the Grutter v Bollinger case start?

In December 1997, petitioner filed suit in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan against the Law School, the Regents of the University of Michigan, Lee Bollinger (Dean of the Law School from 1987 to 1994, and President of the University of Michigan from 1996 to 2002), Jeffrey Lehman ( …

Is Grutter v Bollinger still good law?

The decision largely upheld the Court’s decision in Regents of the University of California v. Bakke (1978), which allowed race to be a consideration in admissions policy but held racial quotas to be unconstitutional.

What was the Supreme Court’s rationale in the Civil Rights Cases 1883 for why Congress could not prohibit discrimination in public accommodations?

Supreme court decided that discrimination in a variety of accommodations, including theaters, hotels, and railroads, could not be prohibited by the act because such discrimination was private, not state, discrimination.

What resulted from the Supreme Court’s ruling in Regents of the University of California v Bakke 1978 )?

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.

Which of the following was a consequence of the Supreme Court decisions in 1883 called the Civil Rights Cases?

Impact. The Supreme Court’s decision in the Civil Rights Cases virtually stripped the federal government of any power to ensure Black Americans equal protection under the law.