Regents of University of California v. Bakke 438 U.S. 265 (1978)

Author:Kenneth L. Karst

Page 2146

Perhaps the Supreme Court's majority in DEFUNIS V. ODEGAARD (1974) thought a delay in deciding on the constitutionality of racial preferences in state university admissions would give time for development of a political consensus on the issue. The result was just the opposite; by the time Bakke was decided, the question of RACIAL QUOTAS and preferences had become bitterly divisive. Bakke, a nonminority applicant, had been denied admission to the university's medical school at Davis. His state court suit had challenged the school's program setting aside for minority applicants sixteen places in an entering class of 100. Bakke's test scores and grades exceeded those of most minority admittees. The California Supreme Court held that the racial preference denied Bakke the EQUAL PROTECTION OF THE LAWS guaranteed by the FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT.

A fragmented United States Supreme Court agreed, 5?4, that Bakke was entitled to admission, but concluded, in a different 5?4 alignment, that race could be taken into account in a state university's admissions. Four Justices thought the Davis quota violated Title VI of the CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF 1964, which forbids the exclusion of anyone on account of race from any program aided by federal funds. This position was rejected, 5?4. Four other Justices argued that the Davis quota was constitutionally valid as a reasonable, nonstigmatizing remedy for past societal discrimination against racial and ethnic minorities. This view was rejected by Justice LEWIS F. POWELL, who concluded that the Davis quota was a denial of equal protection. His vote, along with the votes of the four Justices who found a Title VI violation, placed Bakke in Davis's 1978 entering class.

Justice Powell's opinion on the constitutional question began by rejecting the notion of a " BENIGN " RACIAL CLASSIFICATION. He concluded that the burden of remedying past societal discrimination could not constitutionally be placed on individuals who had no part in that discrimination?absent the sort of constitutional violation that had been found in school DESEGREGATION cases such as SWANN V. CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG BOARD OF EDUCATION (1971), where color-conscious remedies had been approved. While rejecting quotas, Justice Powell approved the use of race as one factor in a state university's admissions policy for the purpose of promoting diversity in its student body.

Race is relevant to "diversity," of course, mainly because past...

To continue reading