Back to top

 

The University of Michigan Cases

Overview
By Sophie Kim '06

The Supreme Court delivered a victory to proponents of affirmative action on June 23, 2003 in its ruling on the University of Michigan affirmative action cases. By a clear, but narrow, five-member majority, the high court declared that student body diversity in higher education is a compelling state interest that justifies the use of race as a factor in university admissions. At the same time, the Court imposed limits on the consideration of race by upholding one plan at the law school in Grutter v. Bollinger, and striking down another at the undergraduate level in Gratz v. Bollinger.

The Supreme Court embraced the concept of affirmative action in higher education, clarifying its position on race-conscious admissions policies from 25 years ago. The Supreme Court had last addressed the use of race in higher education in the 1978 case of Regents of the University of California v. Bakke. In Bakke, a fragmented Supreme Court ruled the race conscious special admissions policy at the University of California, Davis medical school unconstitutional, but held that race was a permissible factor in higher education admissions decisions. Though subsequent lower court rulings on matters of race conscious policies in university admissions would come to depend on Bakke as case precedent, the fractured nature of the decision spawned competing interpretations of the Court’s exact holding. The Court had the opportunity finally to clarify its position on affirmative action in higher education in Grutter v. Bollinger and Gratz v. Bollinger, two companion cases challenging the admissions policies at the University of Michigan law school and undergraduate division, respectively.

In Grutter, a 5-4 majority held that a diverse student body was a compelling governmental interest and that the University of Michigan’s law school admissions program was narrowly tailored to achieve that goal. The program used race as one of many factors in an individualized review of each applicant. But in Gratz, a 6-3 majority held that the university’s undergraduate admissions program failed the narrow tailoring test because it automatically assigned a number of points to a candidate based on race, which could have a determinative effect. In both rulings, the Court depended on the opinion of Justice Lewis Powell, whose opinion was never endorsed by any other Justice at the time, but nonetheless represented the deciding vote in Bakke. Justice Powell’s view that the Constitution tolerated race consciousness, but not quotas, has dominated college admissions programs since then. And a clear majority of the Court unequivocally embraced this notion, too.

Two Students' Views on the University of Michigan Cases

Back to top