Grutter v.

Bollinger (2003) 5-4 Facts: University of Michigan’s law school uses several factors including LSATs and GPA to determine who it will accept. However these quantitative factors other criteria played a role, the largest of these was a preference of the school for racial and ethnic diversity especially with those who have been historically discriminated against. Barbra Grutter a white applicant was denied from the school and sued. Issue: Does the Racial preference in the admissions process violate the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause? JB: No it does not Holding: It does not. Rationale: (Justice O’Connor)  “The Law School’s educational judgment that such diversity is essential to it’s educational mission is one to which we defer.” (714)  “the Law School’s concept of critical mass is defined by reference to the educational benefits that diversity is designed to produce.” (715)  “The Law School does not premise its need for critical mass on ‘any belief that minority students always (or even consistently) express some characteristic minority viewpoint on any issue.’” (715)  “We are satisfied that the Law School’s admissions program, like the Harvard plan described by Justice Powell, does not operate as a quota. Properly understood, a ‘quota’ is a program in which certain fixed number or proportion of opportunities are ‘reserved exclusively for certain minority groups.’” (716)  “Here the Law School engages in a highly individualized, holistic review of each applicant’s file, giving serious consideration to all the ways and applicant might contribute to a diverse educational environment.” (716)  “[I]n the context of its individualized inquiry into the possible diversity contributions of all applicants, the Law School’s raceconscious admissions program does not unduly harm minority applicants.” (716) Concurrence: (Justice Ginsburg)  “one may hope, but not firmly forecast, that over the next generation’s span, progress toward nondiscrimination and genuinely equal opportunity will make it safe to sunset affirmative action.” (717) Concurring in part and Dissenting in part: (Justice Scalia)  “The Constitution proscribes government discrimination on the basis of race, and state-provided education is no exception.” (718) Concurring in part and Dissenting in part: (Justice Thomas)  “I believe blacks can achieve in every avenue of American life without the meddling of university administrators.” (719) Dissent: (Chief Justice Rehnquist)  “[T]he Law School’s disparate admissions practices with respect to these minority groups demonstrate that its alleged goal of ‘critical mass’ is a sham” (723) Dissent: (Justice Kennedy)

. Basically the fact that they so closely tracked the racial breakdown of each class shows how much it mattered. and that it mattered too much.