Powell opined that because the university had admitted that it could not prove that Bakke would not have been admitted even had there been no special admissions program, the portion of the California Supreme Court's decision ordering Bakke's admission was proper, and was upheld. True, the procedure by which disadvantage is detected is informal, but we have never insisted that educators conduct their affairs through adjudicatory proceedings, and such insistence here is misplaced. In the first place, these statements must be read in the context in which they were made. The Southern States took the first steps to reenslave the Negroes. If it is the individual who is entitled to judicial protection against classifications based upon his racial or ethnic background because such distinctions impinge upon personal rights, rather than the individual only because of his membership in a particular group, then constitutional standards may be applied consistently. That order was stayed pending review in this Court.
In 1995 and 1996, two lawsuits challenged the constitutionality of using race in the admission processes at the University of Michigan and the University of Michigan Law School. Ethnic diversity, however, is only one element in a range of factors a university properly may consider in attaining the goal of a heterogeneous student body. Compagnie Generale Transatlantique, 309 U. Academic freedom, though not a specifically enumerated constitutional right, long has been viewed as a special concern of the First Amendment. They suggested that any admissions program with the intention of remedying past race discrimination would be constitutional, whether that involved adding bonus points for race, or setting aside a specific number of places for them.
That freedom is therefore a special concern of the First Amendment. And a court would not assume that a university, professing to employ a facially nondiscriminatory admissions policy, would operate it as a cover for the functional equivalent of a quota system. Indeed, petitioner has not shown that its preferential classification is likely to have any significant effect on the problem. The Courts of Appeals have fashioned various types of racial preferences as remedies for constitutional or statutory violations resulting in identified, race-based injuries to individuals held entitled to the preference. Storandt expressed sympathy for Bakke's position and offered advice on litigation strategy. The difficulty of the issue presented -- whether government may use race-conscious programs to redress the continuing effects of past discrimination -- and the mature consideration which each of our Brethren has brought to it have resulted in many opinions, no single one speaking for the Court.
Preferring members of any one group for no reason other than race or ethnic origin is discrimination for its own sake. . Petitioner has not challenged this aspect of the decision. Cox, The Role of the Supreme Court in American Government 114 1976. In such a case, the extent of the injury and the consequent remedy will have been judicially, legislatively, or administratively defined. Our allusion to the proportional percentage of minorities in the population of the State administering the program is not intended to establish either that figure or that population universe as a constitutional benchmark. And it is clear from our cases that specific proof that a person has been victimized by discrimination is not a necessary predicate to offering him relief where the probability of victimization is great.
For example, Representative Gill stated that no private right of action was contemplated: Nowhere in this section do you find a comparable right of legal action for a person who feels he has been denied his rights to participate in the benefits of Federal funds. Rodriguez, , -17 1973 ; Dunn v. To he extent that Congress acted under the Commerce Clause power, it was restricted in the use of race in governmental decisionmaking by the equal protection component of the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment precisely to the same extent as are the States by § 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment. Link to this page: Regents of the University of California v. The United States urged the court to remand the case to allow for further fact-finding a position also taken by civil rights groups in their amicus briefs. Davis, , 242 1976 ; see Yick Wo v.
To gain access, simply sign in. Kraemer, 1948 ; Brown v. Bard of Education, 1954 ; Hills v. Lowrey to whom he had written in protest of the special admissions program. The Southern delegation insisted that the charge be deleted; the colonists themselves were implicated in the slave trade, and inclusion of this claim might have made it more difficult to justify the continuation of slavery once the ties to England were severed.
Title b 6 ii 1977 provides: Even in the absence of such prior discrimination, a recipient, in administering a program, may take affirmative action to overcome the effects of conditions which resulted in limiting participation by persons of a particular race, color, or national origin. They claimed they were subjected to a form of reverse discrimination due to the university's affirmative action policies. About one-fifth of the special applicants were invited for interviews in 1973 and 1974, following which they were given benchmark scores, and the top choices were then given to the general admissions committee, which could reject special candidates for failure to meet course requirements or other specific deficiencies. It is inconceivable that Congress intended to encourage voluntary efforts to eliminate the evil of racial discrimination while at the same time forbidding the voluntary use of race-conscious remedies to cure acknowledged or obvious statutory violations. At some time, however, beyond any period of what some would claim is only transitional inequality, the United States must and will reach a stage of maturity where action along this line is no longer necessary.
See also Bickel, The Original Understanding and the Segregation Decision, 69 Harv. Initially, the entering class was 50 students, and eight seats were put aside for minorities; when the class size doubled in 1971, there were 16 seats which were to be filled by candidates recommended by the special committee. If ways are not found to remedy that situation, the country can never achieve its professed goal of a society that is not race-conscious. All of the answers are correct. Although a university must have wide discretion in making the sensitive judgments as to who should be admitted, constitutional limitations protecting individual rights may not be disregarded. If these questions were answered affirmatively, the application was forwarded to the special admissions committee. Termination of funding as a sanction for noncompliance is authorized, but only after a hearing and after the failure of voluntary means to secure compliance.
See also remarks of Representative Abernethy id. V A It may be assumed that the reservation of a specified number of seats in each class for individuals from the preferred ethnic groups would contribute to the attainment of considerable ethnic diversity in the student body. It is because of a legacy of unequal treatment that we now must permit the institutions of this society to give consideration to race in making decisions about who will hold the positions of influence, affluence, and prestige in America. After further briefing on the question of , the Supreme Court dismissed the case, 5-4, holding that as DeFunis had almost completed his studies, there was no longer a to decide. Direct discrimination by Federal, State or local governments is prohibited by the Constitution.