Decision
It is important to note that there were two opposing 4-person plurality opinions and then Justice Powell's. Each of the 4-person plurality opinions concurred only with parts of Justice Powell's opinion and not the same parts.
Justices Brennan, White, Marshall and Blackmun concluded in one plurality opinion that race could be used as a factor when it was for the purpose of remedying substantial chronic underrepresentation of certain minorities in the medical profession.
Chief Justice Burger, Justice Stewart, and Justice Rehnquist joined Justice Stevens' view that whether race could ever be a factor was not at issue in the case, but that the special admissions program under consideration violated Title VI because it excluded from consideration an applicant on the basis of race.
Justice Powell concluded that though race could not be the basis for excluding a candidate, race may be one of many factors in admissions considerations.
The issue before the Court was twofold: 1. Whether Bakke's exclusion from consideration in UC Davis Medical School special admissions program for minorities because he was white was unconstitutional and a violation of section VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964; and 2. if it was unconstitutional, should UC Davis Medical School be required to admit him.
Justice Powell concluded that excluding a candidate from consideration solely on the basis of race was unconstitutional, no matter what the purpose, and since UC Davis Medical School could not prove that, even without the special admissions program, Bakke would never have been admitted anyway, UC Davis was compelled to admit Bakke.
Though the Stevens' plurality opinion did not concur with Powell's assertion that race could be one factor among many in admissions' considerations, it did agree with Powell that the UC Davis special admissions program excluding Bakke because he was white was unconstitutional. Stevens' plurality also concurred with that part of Powell's opinion that UC Davis should be required to admit Bakke.
Therefore, though there was no clear-cut majority view on using race as a factor in general, there was a 5–4 split in which the majority (the Stevens plurality and Powell) agreed that the UC Davis Special admissions program was unconstitutional because it excluded applicants on the basis of race. Similarly the same 5–4 split concurred that UC Davis be required to admit Bakke.
Some refer to using race as a basis to exclude applicants as a racial quota system. An institution's special admissions program that is designed to admit people of a certain ethnic group and excludes consideration of candidates from other ethnic groups is in effect an assurance that the institution will admit a certain number of the members from a specified ethnic group, i.e. the institution meets a quota of members of those designated ethnic groups. Justice Powell, who announced the judgment of the court, stated that the appellation of the process is irrelevant (at page 289.)
Powell found that quotas insulated minority applicants from competition with the regular applicants and were thus unconstitutional because they discriminated against non-minority applicants. Powell however stated that universities could use race as a plus factor. He cited the Harvard College Admissions Program which had been filed as an amicus curiae as an example of a constitutionally valid affirmative action program which took into account all of an applicant's qualities including race in a "holistic review".
Title VI of the civil rights statute prohibits racial discrimination in any institution that receives federal funding. Justices Burger, Stewart, Rehnquist, and Stevens supported a strict interpretation and, thus, ruled in favor of Bakke. Justices Brennan, Marshall, Blackmun, and White, however, disagreed with a rigid and literal interpretation of Title VI. The nature of this split opinion created controversy over whether Powell's opinion was binding. However, in 2003, in Grutter v. Bollinger and Gratz v. Bollinger, the Supreme Court affirmed Powell's opinion, rejecting "quotas", but allowing race to be one "factor" in college admissions to meet the compelling interest of diversity.
Read more about this topic: Regents Of The University Of California V. Bakke
Famous quotes containing the word decision:
“The decision to have a child is both a private and a public decision, for children are our collective future.”
—Sylvia Ann Hewitt (20th century)
“A good decision is based on knowledge and not on numbers.”
—Plato (c. 427–347 B.C.)
“The impulse to perfection cannot exist where the definition of perfection is the arbitrary decision of authority. That which is born in loneliness and from the heart cannot be defended against the judgment of a committee of sycophants. The volatile essences which make literature cannot survive the clichés of a long series of story conferences.”
—Raymond Chandler (1888–1959)