Synopsis
of the facts of Grutter v. Bollinger
In 1997, Barbara Grutter, a resident of Michigan, applied for admission to the University of Michigan law school. Grutter, who is white, had a 3.8 undergraduate GPA and scored 161 on the LSAT. She was denied admission and subsequently filed suit, claiming that her rights to equal protection under the Fourteenth Amendment had been violated.
At the time, the law school had an admissions policy that used race as a factor in the admissions process. In selecting students, the law school considered the applicant's academic ability, including undergraduate GPA, LSAT scores, the applicant's personal statement, and letters of recommendation. The school also considered factors such as the applicant's experience, the quality of the undergraduate institution he/she had attended, and the degree to which the applicant would contribute to law school life and the diversity of the community. The admissions policy did not define the types of diversity that would receive special consideration, but did make reference to the inclusion of African-American, Hispanic, and Native-American students, who might otherwise be under-represented.
The school thought this policy complied with Bakke, on
the grounds that it served a "compelling interest in achieving
diversity among its student body." The District Court
ruled that the goal of achieving a diverse student body
was not a compelling one. In reversing this decision,
the Court of Appeals said that Justice Powell's opinion
in Regents of the University of California v.
Bakke, constituted a binding precedent establishing
diversity as a compelling governmental interest sufficient
under strict scrutiny review to justify the use of racial
preferences in admissions. Furthermore, the attempt to
enroll a "critical mass" of minorities was not comparable
to a quota system.
.
|
Online
legal resources at your fingertips. 
Search
the web for reviews and law journals.