Regents of the university of california v. bakke
Case name: Regents of the University of California v. Allan Bakke
Year decided: 1978
Result: 5-4, in favor of Bakke
Related constitutional issue/amendment: Fourteenth Amendment (equal protection clause)
Civil rights or civil liberties: civil rights
Significance/precedent: The justices ruled that the use of racial quota systems (the University of California Medical School at Davis reserved 16 of 100 places for minorities) violated the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. However, the use of race as a factor in admissions to institutions of higher education with the goal of sponsoring ethnic diversity is indeed constitutional. Regents of the University of California v. Bakke established rational guidelines, including the unconstitutionality of quota systems and requiring race to be just one of the many factors that college admissions must consider, through which affirmative action can help eliminate the effects of discrimination while still guaranteeing the equality that is protected by the Constitution.
Quote from the majority opinion: "The fatal flaw in petitioner's preferential program is its disregard of individual rights as guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment. Such rights are not absolute. But when a State's distribution of benefits or imposition of burdens hinges on ancestry or the color of a person's skin, that individual is entitled to a demonstration that the challenged classification is necessary to promote a substantial state interest."
Summary of the dissent: The exclusion of applicants on the basis of race does not violate the Fourteenth Amendment nor the Civil Rights Act of 1964 because the exclusion "carries no racial stigma," or no discrimination meant to harm or disgrace.
Six-word summary: Racial quotas unconstitutional, affirmative action constitutional.
Year decided: 1978
Result: 5-4, in favor of Bakke
Related constitutional issue/amendment: Fourteenth Amendment (equal protection clause)
Civil rights or civil liberties: civil rights
Significance/precedent: The justices ruled that the use of racial quota systems (the University of California Medical School at Davis reserved 16 of 100 places for minorities) violated the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. However, the use of race as a factor in admissions to institutions of higher education with the goal of sponsoring ethnic diversity is indeed constitutional. Regents of the University of California v. Bakke established rational guidelines, including the unconstitutionality of quota systems and requiring race to be just one of the many factors that college admissions must consider, through which affirmative action can help eliminate the effects of discrimination while still guaranteeing the equality that is protected by the Constitution.
Quote from the majority opinion: "The fatal flaw in petitioner's preferential program is its disregard of individual rights as guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment. Such rights are not absolute. But when a State's distribution of benefits or imposition of burdens hinges on ancestry or the color of a person's skin, that individual is entitled to a demonstration that the challenged classification is necessary to promote a substantial state interest."
Summary of the dissent: The exclusion of applicants on the basis of race does not violate the Fourteenth Amendment nor the Civil Rights Act of 1964 because the exclusion "carries no racial stigma," or no discrimination meant to harm or disgrace.
Six-word summary: Racial quotas unconstitutional, affirmative action constitutional.