Regents of the University of California v. Bakke case brief

Regents of the University of California v. Bakke (1978)(p. 233) Court first considered Affirmative Action. The only way out is to protect everyone.

Facts: UC at Davis medical school reserved 16 seats for minority applicants. The people who go the 84 remaining seats never competed with the 16 reserved seats people. Bakke, a white applicant, filed suit claiming that minority students of lower qualifications were admitted when he was not.

Holding: Admissions program violated Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 b/c it constituted racial discrimination by a recipient of federal financial assistance. No majority as to rationale of the decision and thus no agreement or ruling as to the appropriate standard of review. Court did not like the quota system – they liked the Harvard system – race was a factor in the outcome or decisions – not a separate categories.

**This is a plurality opinion – no majority as to analysis and basis of the decision – but they arrive at the same decision.

Stevens, Burger, Stewart, Rehnquist: Did not discuss the level of scrutiny.

Powell: Said strict scrutiny should be applied because the Equal Protection clause protects all people equally. Favored the Harvard College plan because it made race “a” factor and not “the” factor.

Brennan Four dissent: Wanted to apply intermediate scrutiny. They said strict scrutiny inappropriate for “benign” racial classifications, which they said consisted of those that do not stigmatize those disadvantaged by the classification. Said UC Davis’ “purpose of remedying the effects of past societal discrimination” is “sufficiently important to justify the use of race-conscious admissions programs where there is a sound basis for concluding that minority under-representation is substantial and chronic, and that the handicap of prior discrimination is impeding access of minorities to the Medical School.”