B is for Bakke

Regents of the University of California v Bakke
[June 28, 1978, plurality opinion]

This case involved the University of California at Davis, Medical School, and Allan Bakke, a white applicant who was rejected twice even though there were minority applicants admitted with significantly lower scores than his.

Bakke's argument – a dual system, with minorities and disadvantaged applicants subject to different standards and with a set number of spaces allocated to those students, excluded him from the university on the basis of his race and constituted a violation of the Equal Protection Clause.

University's argument – affirmative action, and to ensure diversity in the student body, were legitimate factors to consider when admitting students.

A closely divided Court, with six separate written opinions [none of which had five justices in agreement to constitute a binding ruling of the Court], ruled that while race was a legitimate consideration in school admissions and can be one factor among many, the use of rigid quotas was not permissible.  The Court found that in this instance, a rigid quota system was used because there were a set number of admissions slots that could only be filled by minority and disadvantaged applicants.  Therefore, Bakke must be admitted to the medical school.

Bakke enrolled in the medical school and graduated in 1982.  He pursued a career as an anesthesiologist.

Several subsequent cases did result in a binding determination that affirmative action programs are acceptable if they consider race as one of many factors, so long as there is no rigid quota system.


Did you guess right?
Here's Tuesday's hint - C is for Citizens.  Can you guess the case and what it's about?  Leave a comment!