Regents of the University of California v. Bakke (Great Events from History: North American Series)
Article abstract: The U.S. Supreme Court defines racial quotas in preferential admissions programs to be unconstitutional yet also declares that an applicant’s race can be a consideration.
Summary of Event
The case of Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, better known as the Bakke case, led to a significant U.S. Supreme Court civil rights decision. It was the first case concerning the constitutionality of preferential college admissions programs to be heard by the Supreme Court. Although the decision of the Court settled some questions concerning the legality of race-conscious admissions processes, the lack of a majority opinion in the case left other questions unresolved.
At the time of this decision, the defendant in the case, a white man by the name of Allan Paul Bakke, was thirty-eight years of age. In 1973, he had been an applicant for a space in the fall entering class at the University of California at Davis’ Medical School (UCDMS); he also applied later that year for a space in the 1974 entering class. While one hundred spaces were available for the entering class, sixteen of these spaces had been set aside each year since 1971 for a special admissions program intended to benefit disadvantaged applicants who had identified themselves on their applications as belonging to one of several minority groups. Despite the fact that Bakke’s grade point average as well as...
(The entire section is 1378 words.)
Want to Read More?
Subscribe now to read the rest of this article. Plus get complete access to 30,000+ study guides!
Regents of the University of California v. Bakke (West's Encyclopedia of American Law)
A 1978 decision by the Supreme Court, Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, 438 U.S.
265, 98 S. Ct. 2733, 57 L. Ed. 2d 750, commonly referred to as Bakke, held that. although the university unlawfully discriminated against a white applicant by denying him admission to its medical school solely on the basis of his race, the university may consider the race of an applicant in its admission procedure in order to attain ethnic diversity in its student body.
In 1972, Allan Bakke, a 33-year-old white male engineer, applied for admission to the medical school of the University of California at Davis and was not accepted. Bakke was one of 2,664 applicants that year for 100 places. He applied again the next year and was again rejected. This second year, minority applicants with grade point averages, Medical College Admission Test scores, and other qualifications that...
(The entire section is 1012 words.)
Regents of the University of California v. Bakke (Supreme Court Drama)
Petitioner: The University of California at Davis Medical School
Petitioner's Claim: That the University of California Medical School's special admission affirmative action program violated Bakke's civil rights when he was denied admission.
Chief Lawyer for Petitioner: Archibald Cox, Paul J. Mishkin, Jack B. Owens, Donald L. Reidhaar
Chief Lawyer for Respondent: Reynold H. Colvin
Justices for the Court: Chief Justice Warren Burger, Lewis F. Powell, Jr., William H. Rehnquist, John Paul Stevens, Potter Stewart
Justices Dissenting: Harry A. Blackmun, William J. Brennan, Jr., Thurgood Marshall, Byron R. White
Date of Decision: June 28, 1978
Decision: Ruled in favor of Bakke by finding the school's special admissions program unconstitutional because of its use of quotas and that Bakke should be admitted.
Significance: The Court ruled that race could be one factor among several considered for admissions, but it could not be the only factor considered. Since race could be considered, the ruling was the first court approval of affirmative action.
On October 12, 1977 a long line wound its way up the marble staircase and between the towering columns of the U.S. Supreme Court building. Some had camped out all night to get a chance to hear the case to be argued that day, Regents of the University of California v. Allan Bakke, the first affirmative action case to reach the Supreme Court.
The courtroom was packed, yet most of the audience had obtained tickets through their connections to the court or through the parties to the case. Despite their special interest in the case, only a small number of people of color or women could be spotted in the select gathering. This alone was testimony (evidence) to the many years of gender (sex) exclusion in professional circles.
Demonstrators who marched in the streets that day were of a decidedly different makeup. Men and women of all colors marched not only outside the Court but from New York to Berkeley, California, raising banners and chanting slogans such as "We won't go back. We won't go back!" The crowds put the Court and world on notice that whatever the outcome in the case, the struggle to open the doors of universities to minorities would go on, never to return to the days when the same demonstrators' grandparents and parents could not gain admission. However, not all Americans supported these demonstrators. Many were opposed to giving increased opportunity at the expense of others through affirmative action programs.
What's All the Fuss About?
Affirmative action means making a special effort to provide opportunities in education and businesses for members of groups (people of color and women) that had been discriminated (giving privileges to one group but not to another) against in the past. In the mid-1970s, educational affirmative action programs often used "quotas." Quotas meant setting a goal that a certain number of minority students would be admitted.
The medical school at the Davis campus of the University of California had such a program in 1970. The program called for a quota of sixteen out of one hundred openings to be filled by disadvantaged students from minority groups. The medical school viewed minority groups as "Blacks," "Chicanos," "Asians," and "American Indians." Under special admission procedures, the minority applicants were evaluated by placing less focus on test scores and grade point average and more on the applicant's overall life and qualifications. The medical school did not rate or compare special applicants against students applying under regular admission requirements, but recommended special applicants for admission until the sixteen places were filled. This enabled sixteen minority students to join Davis' freshman class of one hundred students.
Allan Bakke, a white, thirty-seven year old engineer, wanted to be a medical doctor. He applied in 1973 and again in 1974 through the regular admission process to the University of California at Davis Medical School. Although each year he appeared more qualified than several students admitted through the affirmative action special admissions program, Bakke was rejected both years. As a result, Bakke sued for admission to the Davis medical school. He claimed the medical school's special admission policy denied admission to him solely on the basis of his race thus violating his rights under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The trial court agreed with Bakke and ruled the special admissions procedure unconstitutional (not following the intent of the U.S. Constitution). Yet, the court refused to order the school to admit
As demonstrators chanted outside, Archibald Cox for the university and Reynold Colvin, Bakke's lawyer, argued the case. Cox, a Harvard law professor who had appeared before the Court many times, defended the university's affirmative action special admissions program. He claimed it was a fair and constitutional way of making up for past discrimination against minority groups. The program gave new opportunity to members of groups which had not had these opportunities in the past.
Colvin, in his first Supreme Court appearance, made several claims against the university. He argued that the admission policy was in conflict with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Title VI prohibits discrimination based on race, color, or national origin in programs which receive federal funds. All state university programs, including the Davis medical school, receive such funds. Furthermore, Colvin argued if Title VI was violated, then the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment guaranteeing "equal protection of the laws" was also violated. Therefore, the special admission policy was unconstitutional. Continuing in Bakke's defense, Colvin suggested the program went too far in offering increased opportunities for minority groups and seemed to be "reverse discrimination." Reverse discrimination is the lessening of opportunity for a group of people not traditionally discriminated against such as white males.
Two Majority Opinions
More than eight months would pass before the Supreme Court delivered its decision. The Court was as sharply divided over the affirmative action issue as the nation was. Two majority opinions were presented. Each of the opinions was agreed to by a different grouping of five justices. Justice Lewis F. Powell was key to the Bakke decision being the only justice in both majorities.
The two 5 majority opinions delivered by Justice Powell were:
- The special admissions program with a fixed quota or number of places available only to minorities violated Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Those places were denied to white applicants based only on their race. The university's policy was struck down and the university was ordered to admit Bakke.
- Admissions programs do not violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment if they consider race as one of several factors used to decide admission. Therefore, race may be considered but it may not be the only factor considered.
Developing the Two Opinions
The two majority opinions developed in the following manner. In the first opinion four justices (John Paul Stevens, Warren Burger, Potter Stewart, and William Rehnquist) avoided completely the constitutional issue of Equal Protection and instead said it was "crystal clear" that the quota system violated Title VI of the Civil Rights Act. These four also agreed race could never be a factor in admissions. Although he reasoned differently, Justice Powell agreed the quota system violated Title VI. His agreement with the Title VI part added up to a five-justice majority, making quota systems illegal. However, he did not agree race could never be used in admission programs.
In the second opinion four different justices (William J. Brennan, Thurgood Marshall, Byron White, and Harry Blackmun) pointed out that "race conscious programs" do not violate the Equal Protection Clause as long as race was only one factor among many factors considered for admission to a program. Powell agreed, and his agreement made a five-justice majority on that point.
Allan Bakke was admitted to the medical school at the University of California Davis. He graduated in 1982.
Justice Marshall's Dissent
Justice Marshall, the first African American to serve on the Supreme Court and a strong supporter of affirmative action programs, commented in one of his most famous dissents,
The position of the Negro today in America is the tragic but inevitable (unavoidable) consequence of centuries of unequal treatment. Measured by any benchmark of comfort or achievement, meaningful equality remains a distant dream for the Negro. . . Now, we have the Court again stepping in, this time to stop affirmative action programs of the type [quota system] used by the University of California.
Based on the ruling, quota systems used in affirmative action programs were out but race could be considered if other factors were also considered. This concession that race could be used as a factor was at least a partial victory for affirmative action and demonstrators who had filled the streets. As is often the case, the divided or split decision seemed to allow more room for differing applications across the country. For example, universities with strong affirmative action programs used the part that the race factor could continue to help them build strong multiracial communities. On the other hand, schools that had always been reluctant in racially integrating their campuses used the decision to abandon attempts at affirmative action.
Affirmative action continued to be a controversial topic in the 1990s. In 1995 demonstrators in California again took to the streets in support of affirmative action programs at the state universities. President Bill Clinton made his famous speech on affirmative action in July of 1995 saying to "mend it, but don't end it." However, in 1996 Californians voted to ban existing state government affirmative action programs. The issue remains controversial and complex.
Suggestions for further reading
Dreyfuss, Joel, and Charles Lawrence III. The Bakke Case: The Politics of Inequality. New York: Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovich, 1979.
Lawrence, Charles R., III, and Mari J. Matsuda. We Won't Go Back: Making the Case for Affirmative Action. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1997.
Welch, Susan, and John Gruhl. Affirmative Action and Minority Enrollments in Medical and Law Schools. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1998.