Grutter v. Bollinger

Grutter v. Bollinger

2003 Supreme Court case on race-conscious admissions in higher education

Year decided

2003

Vote split

5 to 4

Main issue

Whether the University of Michigan Law School could consider race in admissions

Plaintiff

Barbara Grutter a white applicant denied admission

University involved

University of Michigan Law School

Constitutional clause at issue

Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment

Was the policy upheld

Yes it was ruled constitutional

Compelling interest recognized

Diversity in higher education

Legal standard applied

Strict scrutiny

Strict scrutiny requires

A compelling interest and narrow tailoring

How race was used

As one of many factors in holistic review

Was a quota used

No quotas were not permitted

Definition of holistic review

Admissions process that considers multiple aspects of the applicant

Critical mass

A sufficient number of minority students to promote meaningful diversity

Is critical mass a quota

No it is flexible and not tied to a number

Majority opinion author

Justice Sandra Day O’Connor

Was race determinative

No it was considered as a plus factor

Was the policy narrowly tailored

Yes the Court found it met strict scrutiny

Comparison to Bakke

Expanded on Bakke by affirming diversity as a compelling interest

Effect on college admissions

Permitted race-conscious admissions under specific conditions

Race-neutral alternatives

Must be seriously considered but not always required

Court’s rationale

Diverse student bodies promote richer education for all

Plus factor

An attribute that may help but does not guarantee admission

Was the policy time-limited

O’Connor noted that such programs should not be permanent

Outcome for Grutter

She lost the case

Why affirmative action was upheld

It was flexible individualized and aimed at educational benefits

Court’s warning

Programs must avoid mechanical or formulaic use of race

Dissenting view

Race should never be used in admissions

How Grutter differs from Gratz

Gratz was struck down for being too formulaic

Impact on future litigation

Grutter served as precedent until overturned in 2023

Legacy of the case

Established diversity as a valid reason for using race

Importance of individualized consideration

Prevents race from being the dominant factor

How Court balanced rights

By requiring race to be considered flexibly and fairly

Was the ruling permanent

No it was expected to be reviewed over time

Relation to Equal Protection Clause

Affirmative action must still meet constitutional standards

Effect on universities

Encouraged them to design narrowly tailored admissions policies

What universities must avoid

Quotas and point systems

Public reaction to ruling

Mixed with both support and opposition

Did the Court define a compelling interest

Yes it affirmed that diversity qualifies

Was the policy upheld in part or whole

Whole policy was upheld under strict scrutiny

What race-neutral methods were considered

Admissions based solely on academic or socio-economic factors

What the Court encouraged

Ongoing evaluation of necessity and effectiveness

Standard reaffirmed

Strict scrutiny governs all race-based government policies

How race-neutral options fit in

Must be examined but don’t have to be adopted if inadequate

Impact on law schools

Allowed continued use of holistic admissions with race as a factor

Final takeaway

Race may be considered but never dominate the decision-making process