grutter
bollinger
et
argued
april
decided
june
university
michigan
law
school
law
school
one
nation
top
law
schools
follows
official
admissions
policy
seeks
achieve
student
body
diversity
compliance
regents
univ
cal
bakke
focusing
students
academic
ability
coupled
flexible
assessment
talents
experiences
potential
policy
requires
admissions
officials
evaluate
applicant
based
information
available
file
including
personal
statement
letters
recommendation
essay
describing
applicant
contribute
law
school
life
diversity
applicant
undergraduate
grade
point
average
gpa
law
school
admissions
test
lsat
score
additionally
officials
must
look
beyond
grades
scores
soft
variables
recommenders
enthusiasm
quality
undergraduate
institution
applicant
essay
areas
difficulty
undergraduate
course
selection
policy
define
diversity
solely
terms
racial
ethnic
status
restrict
types
diversity
contributions
eligible
substantial
weight
reaffirm
law
school
commitment
diversity
special
reference
inclusion
hispanic
students
otherwise
might
represented
student
body
meaningful
numbers
enrolling
critical
mass
underrepresented
minority
students
policy
seeks
ensure
ability
contribute
law
school
character
legal
profession
law
school
denied
admission
petitioner
grutter
white
michigan
resident
gpa
lsat
score
filed
suit
alleging
respondents
discriminated
basis
race
violation
fourteenth
amendment
title
vi
civil
rights
act
rejected
law
school
uses
race
predominant
factor
giving
applicants
belonging
certain
minority
groups
significantly
greater
chance
admission
students
similar
credentials
disfavored
racial
groups
respondents
compelling
interest
justify
use
race
district
found
law
school
use
race
admissions
factor
unlawful
sixth
circuit
reversed
holding
justice
powell
opinion
bakke
binding
precedent
establishing
diversity
compelling
state
interest
law
school
use
race
narrowly
tailored
race
merely
potential
factor
law
school
program
virtually
identical
harvard
admissions
program
described
approvingly
justice
powell
appended
bakke
opinion
held
law
school
narrowly
tailored
use
race
admissions
decisions
compelling
interest
obtaining
educational
benefits
flow
diverse
student
body
prohibited
equal
protection
clause
title
vi
pp
landmark
bakke
case
reviewed
medical
school
racial
program
reserved
seats
members
certain
minority
groups
decision
produced
six
separate
opinions
none
commanded
majority
four
justices
upheld
program
ground
government
use
race
remedy
disadvantages
cast
minorities
past
racial
prejudice
four
justices
struck
program
statutory
grounds
justice
powell
announcing
judgment
provided
fifth
vote
invalidating
program
also
reversing
state
injunction
use
race
whatsoever
part
opinion
joined
justice
justice
powell
expressed
view
attaining
diverse
student
body
interest
asserted
university
survived
scrutiny
grounding
analysis
academic
freedom
long
viewed
special
concern
first
amendment
justice
powell
emphasized
future
depends
upon
leaders
trained
wide
exposure
ideas
mores
students
diverse
nation
however
also
emphasized
interest
simple
ethnic
diversity
specified
percentage
student
body
effect
guaranteed
members
selected
ethnic
groups
justify
using
race
rather
diversity
furthers
compelling
state
interest
encompasses
far
broader
array
qualifications
characteristics
racial
ethnic
origin
single
though
important
element
ibid
since
bakke
justice
powell
opinion
touchstone
constitutional
analysis
admissions
policies
public
private
universities
across
nation
modeled
admissions
programs
justice
powell
views
courts
however
struggled
discern
whether
justice
powell
diversity
rationale
binding
precedent
finds
unnecessary
decide
issue
endorses
justice
powell
view
student
body
diversity
compelling
state
interest
context
university
admissions
pp
government
racial
classifications
must
analyzed
reviewing
strict
scrutiny
adarand
constructors
peña
uses
invalidated
strict
scrutiny
action
necessary
compelling
governmental
interest
violate
equal
protection
clause
long
narrowly
tailored
interest
shaw
hunt
context
matters
reviewing
action
see
gomillion
lightfoot
every
decision
influenced
race
equally
objectionable
strict
scrutiny
designed
provide
framework
carefully
examining
importance
sincerity
government
reasons
using
race
particular
context
endorses
justice
powell
view
student
body
diversity
compelling
state
interest
justify
using
race
university
admissions
defers
law
school
educational
judgment
diversity
essential
educational
mission
scrutiny
interest
less
strict
taking
account
complex
educational
judgments
area
lies
primarily
within
university
expertise
see
bakke
path
leadership
must
visibly
open
talented
qualified
individuals
every
race
ethnicity
thus
law
school
compelling
interest
attaining
diverse
student
body
law
school
admissions
program
bears
hallmarks
narrowly
tailored
plan
narrowly
tailored
admissions
program
insulat
category
applicants
certain
desired
qualifications
competition
applicants
bakke
supra
opinion
powell
instead
may
consider
race
ethnicity
particular
applicant
file
must
flexible
enough
consider
pertinent
elements
diversity
light
particular
qualifications
applicant
place
footing
consideration
although
necessarily
according
weight
follows
universities
establish
quotas
members
certain
racial
ethnic
groups
put
separate
admissions
tracks
see
law
school
admissions
program
like
harvard
plan
approved
justice
powell
satisfies
requirements
moreover
program
flexible
enough
ensure
applicant
evaluated
individual
way
makes
race
ethnicity
defining
feature
application
see
bakke
supra
opinion
powell
law
school
engages
highly
individualized
holistic
review
applicant
file
giving
serious
consideration
ways
applicant
might
contribute
diverse
educational
environment
policy
either
de
jure
de
facto
automatic
acceptance
rejection
based
single
soft
variable
gratz
bollinger
ante
distinguished
also
program
adequately
ensures
factors
may
contribute
diversity
meaningfully
considered
alongside
race
moreover
law
school
frequently
accepts
nonminority
applicants
grades
test
scores
lower
underrepresented
minority
applicants
nonminority
applicants
rejected
rejects
argument
law
school
used
means
obtain
educational
benefits
student
body
diversity
lottery
system
decreasing
emphasis
gpa
lsat
scores
narrow
tailoring
require
exhaustion
every
conceivable
alternative
mandate
university
choose
maintaining
reputation
excellence
fulfilling
commitment
provide
educational
opportunities
members
racial
groups
see
wygant
jackson
bd
satisfied
law
school
adequately
considered
available
alternatives
also
satisfied
context
individualized
consideration
possible
diversity
contributions
applicant
law
school
admissions
program
unduly
harm
nonminority
applicants
finally
admissions
policies
must
limited
time
takes
law
school
word
like
nothing
better
find
admissions
formula
terminate
use
racial
preferences
soon
practicable
expects
years
use
racial
preferences
longer
necessary
interest
approved
today
pp
law
school
use
race
admissions
decisions
prohibited
equal
protection
clause
petitioner
statutory
claims
based
title
vi
also
fail
see
bakke
supra
opinion
powell
general
building
contractors
pennsylvania
pp
affirmed
delivered
opinion
stevens
souter
ginsburg
breyer
joined
scalia
thomas
joined
part
insofar
consistent
views
expressed
part
vii
opinion
thomas
ginsburg
filed
concurring
opinion
breyer
joined
scalia
filed
opinion
concurring
part
dissenting
part
thomas
joined
thomas
filed
opinion
concurring
part
dissenting
part
scalia
joined
parts
rehnquist
filed
dissenting
opinion
scalia
kennedy
thomas
joined
kennedy
filed
dissenting
opinion
barbara
grutter
petitioner
lee
bollinger
et
al
writ
certiorari
appeals
sixth
circuit
june
justice
delivered
opinion
case
requires
us
decide
whether
use
race
factor
student
admissions
university
michigan
law
school
law
school
unlawful
law
school
ranks
among
nation
top
law
schools
receives
applications
year
class
around
students
seeking
admit
group
students
individually
collectively
among
capable
law
school
looks
individuals
substantial
promise
success
law
school
strong
likelihood
succeeding
practice
law
contributing
diverse
ways
others
app
broadly
law
school
seeks
mix
students
varying
backgrounds
experiences
respect
learn
ibid
dean
law
school
charged
faculty
committee
crafting
written
admissions
policy
implement
goals
particular
law
school
sought
ensure
efforts
achieve
student
body
diversity
complied
recent
ruling
use
race
university
admissions
see
regents
univ
cal
bakke
upon
unanimous
adoption
committee
report
law
school
faculty
became
law
school
official
admissions
policy
hallmark
policy
focus
academic
ability
coupled
flexible
assessment
applicants
talents
experiences
potential
contribute
learning
around
app
policy
requires
admissions
officials
evaluate
applicant
based
information
available
file
including
personal
statement
letters
recommendation
essay
describing
ways
applicant
contribute
life
diversity
law
school
reviewing
applicant
file
admissions
officials
must
consider
applicant
undergraduate
grade
point
average
gpa
law
school
admissions
test
lsat
score
important
imperfect
predictors
academic
success
law
school
policy
stresses
applicant
admitted
unless
expect
applicant
well
enough
graduate
serious
academic
problems
policy
makes
clear
however
even
highest
possible
score
guarantee
admission
law
school
low
score
automatically
disqualify
applicant
ibid
rather
policy
requires
admissions
officials
look
beyond
grades
test
scores
criteria
important
law
school
educational
objectives
variables
enthusiasm
recommenders
quality
undergraduate
institution
quality
applicant
essay
areas
difficulty
undergraduate
course
selection
brought
bear
assessing
applicant
likely
contributions
intellectual
social
life
institution
ibid
policy
aspires
achieve
diversity
potential
enrich
everyone
education
thus
make
law
school
class
stronger
sum
parts
policy
restrict
types
diversity
contributions
eligible
substantial
weight
admissions
process
instead
recognizes
many
possible
bases
diversity
admissions
policy
however
reaffirm
law
school
longstanding
commitment
one
particular
type
diversity
racial
ethnic
diversity
special
reference
inclusion
students
groups
historically
discriminated
like
hispanics
native
americans
without
commitment
might
represented
student
body
meaningful
numbers
enrolling
mass
underrepresented
minority
students
law
school
seeks
ensur
ability
make
unique
contributions
character
law
school
policy
define
diversity
solely
terms
racial
ethnic
status
policy
insensitive
competition
among
students
admission
aw
chool
ibid
rather
policy
seeks
guide
admissions
officers
producing
classes
diverse
academically
outstanding
classes
made
students
promise
continue
tradition
outstanding
contribution
michigan
graduates
legal
profession
ibid
petitioner
barbara
grutter
white
michigan
resident
applied
law
school
grade
point
average
lsat
score
law
school
initially
placed
petitioner
waiting
list
subsequently
rejected
application
december
petitioner
filed
suit
district
eastern
district
michigan
law
school
regents
university
michigan
lee
bollinger
dean
law
school
president
university
michigan
jeffrey
lehman
dean
law
school
dennis
shields
director
admissions
law
school
petitioner
alleged
respondents
discriminated
basis
race
violation
fourteenth
amendment
title
vi
civil
rights
act
stat
rev
stat
amended
petitioner
alleged
application
rejected
law
school
uses
race
predominant
factor
giving
applicants
belong
certain
minority
groups
significantly
greater
chance
admission
students
similar
credentials
disfavored
racial
groups
app
petitioner
also
alleged
respondents
compelling
interest
justify
use
race
admissions
process
petitioner
requested
compensatory
punitive
damages
order
requiring
law
school
offer
admission
injunction
prohibiting
law
school
continuing
discriminate
basis
race
petitioner
clearly
standing
bring
lawsuit
northeastern
chapter
associated
gen
contractors
america
jacksonville
district
granted
petitioner
motion
class
certification
bifurcation
trial
liability
damages
phases
class
defined
persons
applied
granted
admission
university
michigan
law
school
academic
years
since
including
time
judgment
entered
herein
members
racial
ethnic
groups
including
caucasian
defendants
treated
less
favorably
considering
applications
admission
law
school
app
pet
cert
district
heard
oral
argument
parties
summary
judgment
december
taking
motions
advisement
district
indicated
decide
matter
law
whether
law
school
asserted
interest
obtaining
educational
benefits
flow
diverse
student
body
compelling
district
also
indicated
conduct
bench
trial
extent
race
factor
law
school
admissions
decisions
whether
law
school
consideration
race
admissions
decisions
constituted
double
standard
bench
trial
parties
introduced
extensive
evidence
concerning
law
school
use
race
admissions
process
dennis
shields
director
admissions
petitioner
applied
law
school
testified
direct
staff
admit
particular
percentage
number
minority
students
rather
consider
applicant
race
along
factors
shields
testified
height
admissions
season
frequently
consult
daily
reports
kept
track
racial
ethnic
composition
class
along
information
residency
status
gender
done
shields
testified
ensure
critical
mass
underrepresented
minority
students
reached
realize
educational
benefits
diverse
student
body
ibid
shields
stressed
however
seek
admit
particular
number
percentage
underrepresented
minority
students
ibid
erica
munzel
succeeded
shields
director
admissions
testified
means
representation
understood
mean
number
encourages
underrepresented
minority
students
participate
classroom
feel
isolated
munzel
stated
number
percentage
range
numbers
percentages
constitute
critical
mass
munzel
also
asserted
must
consider
race
applicants
critical
mass
underrepresented
minority
students
enrolled
admissions
decisions
based
primarily
undergraduate
gpas
lsat
scores
ibid
current
dean
law
school
jeffrey
lehman
also
testified
like
law
school
witnesses
lehman
quantify
critical
mass
terms
numbers
percentages
indicated
critical
mass
means
numbers
underrepresented
minority
students
feel
isolated
like
spokespersons
race
ibid
asked
extent
race
considered
admissions
lehman
testified
varies
one
applicant
another
ibid
cases
according
lehman
testimony
applicant
race
may
play
role
others
may
factor
ibid
district
heard
extensive
testimony
professor
richard
lempert
chaired
faculty
committee
drafted
policy
lempert
emphasized
law
school
seeks
students
diverse
interests
backgrounds
enhance
classroom
discussion
educational
experience
inside
outside
classroom
asked
policy
racial
ethnic
diversity
special
reference
inclusion
students
groups
historically
discriminated
lempert
explained
language
purport
remedy
past
discrimination
rather
include
students
may
bring
law
school
perspective
different
members
groups
victims
discrimination
ibid
lempert
acknowledged
groups
asians
jews
experienced
discrimination
explained
mentioned
policy
individuals
members
groups
already
admitted
law
school
significant
numbers
ibid
kent
syverud
final
witness
testify
law
school
use
race
admissions
decisions
syverud
professor
law
school
admissions
policy
adopted
dean
vanderbilt
law
school
addition
testimony
trial
syverud
submitted
several
expert
reports
educational
benefits
diversity
syverud
testimony
indicated
critical
mass
underrepresented
minority
students
present
racial
stereotypes
lose
force
nonminority
students
learn
rather
variety
viewpoints
among
minority
students
attempt
quantify
extent
law
school
actually
considers
race
making
admissions
decisions
parties
introduced
voluminous
evidence
trial
relying
data
obtained
law
school
petitioner
expert
kinley
larntz
generated
analyzed
admissions
grids
years
question
grids
show
number
applicants
number
admittees
combinations
gpas
lsat
scores
larntz
made
comparisons
applicants
different
races
determine
whether
statistically
significant
relationship
existed
race
admission
rates
concluded
membership
certain
minority
groups
extremely
strong
factor
decision
acceptance
applicants
minority
groups
given
extremely
large
allowance
compared
applicants
members
nonfavored
groups
larntz
conceded
however
race
predominant
factor
law
school
admissions
calculus
tr
stephen
raudenbush
law
school
expert
focused
predicted
effect
eliminating
race
factor
law
school
admission
process
raudenbush
view
admissions
system
dramatic
negative
effect
underrepresented
minority
admissions
app
pet
cert
testified
percent
underrepresented
minority
applicants
admitted
ibid
raudenbush
predicted
race
considered
percent
applicants
admitted
ibid
scenario
underrepresented
minority
students
comprised
percent
entering
class
instead
actual
figure
percent
ibid
end
district
concluded
law
school
use
race
factor
admissions
decisions
unlawful
applying
strict
scrutiny
district
determined
law
school
asserted
interest
assembling
diverse
student
body
compelling
attainment
racially
diverse
class
recognized
bakke
remedy
past
discrimination
district
went
hold
even
diversity
compelling
law
school
narrowly
tailored
use
race
interest
district
granted
petitioner
request
declaratory
relief
enjoined
law
school
using
race
factor
admissions
decisions
appeals
entered
stay
injunction
pending
appeal
sitting
en
banc
appeals
reversed
district
judgment
vacated
injunction
appeals
first
held
justice
powell
opinion
bakke
binding
precedent
establishing
diversity
compelling
state
interest
according
appeals
justice
powell
opinion
respect
diversity
comprised
controlling
rationale
judgment
analysis
set
forth
marks
appeals
also
held
law
school
use
race
narrowly
tailored
race
merely
potential
factor
law
school
program
virtually
identical
harvard
admissions
program
described
approvingly
justice
powell
appended
bakke
opinion
four
dissenting
judges
held
law
school
use
race
unconstitutional
three
dissenters
rejecting
majority
marks
analysis
examined
law
school
interest
student
body
diversity
merits
concluded
compelling
fourth
dissenter
writing
separately
found
unnecessary
decide
whether
diversity
compelling
interest
like
dissenters
believed
law
school
use
race
narrowly
tailored
interest
granted
certiorari
resolve
disagreement
among
courts
appeals
question
national
importance
whether
diversity
compelling
interest
justify
narrowly
tailored
use
race
selecting
applicants
admission
public
universities
compare
hopwood
texas
hopwood
holding
diversity
compelling
state
interest
smith
university
law
school
holding
ii
last
addressed
use
race
public
higher
education
years
ago
landmark
bakke
case
reviewed
racial
program
reserved
seats
medical
school
class
members
certain
minority
groups
decision
produced
six
separate
opinions
none
commanded
majority
four
justices
upheld
program
attack
ground
government
use
race
remedy
disadvantages
cast
minorities
past
racial
prejudice
joint
opinion
brennan
white
marshall
blackmun
concurring
judgment
part
dissenting
part
four
justices
avoided
constitutional
question
altogether
struck
program
statutory
grounds
opinion
stevens
joined
burger
stewart
rehnquist
concurring
judgment
part
dissenting
part
justice
powell
provided
fifth
vote
invalidating
program
also
reversing
state
injunction
use
race
whatsoever
holding
bakke
state
substantial
interest
legitimately
may
served
properly
devised
admissions
program
involving
competitive
consideration
race
ethnic
origin
thus
reversed
part
lower
judgment
enjoined
university
consideration
race
applicant
ibid
since
splintered
decision
bakke
justice
powell
opinion
announcing
judgment
served
touchstone
constitutional
analysis
admissions
policies
public
private
universities
across
nation
modeled
admissions
programs
justice
powell
views
permissible
policies
see
brief
judith
areen
et
al
amici
curiae
law
school
admissions
programs
employ
methods
designed
based
justice
powell
opinion
bakke
brief
amherst
college
et
al
amici
curiae
bakke
amici
undoubtedly
selective
colleges
universities
well
reviewed
admissions
procedures
light
justice
powell
opinion
set
sail
accordingly
therefore
discuss
justice
powell
opinion
detail
justice
powell
began
stating
guarantee
equal
protection
mean
one
thing
applied
one
individual
something
else
applied
person
another
color
accorded
protection
equal
bakke
justice
powell
view
governmental
decisions
touch
upon
individual
race
ethnic
background
entitled
judicial
determination
burden
asked
bear
basis
precisely
tailored
serve
compelling
governmental
interest
exacting
standard
one
interests
asserted
university
survived
justice
powell
scrutiny
first
justice
powell
rejected
interest
historic
deficit
traditionally
disfavored
minorities
medical
schools
medical
unlawful
interest
racial
balancing
second
justice
powell
rejected
interest
remedying
societal
discrimination
measures
risk
placing
unnecessary
burdens
innocent
third
parties
bear
responsibility
whatever
harm
beneficiaries
special
admissions
program
thought
suffered
third
justice
powell
rejected
interest
increasing
number
physicians
practice
communities
currently
underserved
concluding
even
interest
compelling
circumstances
program
review
geared
promote
goal
justice
powell
approved
university
use
race
one
interest
attainment
diverse
student
body
important
proviso
constitutional
limitations
protecting
individual
rights
may
disregarded
justice
powell
grounded
analysis
academic
freedom
long
viewed
special
concern
first
amendment
justice
powell
emphasized
nothing
less
future
depends
upon
leaders
trained
wide
exposure
ideas
mores
students
diverse
nation
many
peoples
quoting
keyishian
board
regents
univ
state
seeking
right
select
students
contribute
exchange
ideas
university
seeks
achieve
goal
paramount
importance
fulfillment
mission
tradition
experience
lend
support
view
contribution
diversity
substantial
ibid
justice
powell
however
careful
emphasize
view
race
one
element
range
factors
university
properly
may
consider
attaining
goal
heterogeneous
student
body
justice
powell
interest
simple
ethnic
diversity
specified
percentage
student
body
effect
guaranteed
members
selected
ethnic
groups
justify
use
race
rather
diversity
furthers
compelling
state
interest
encompasses
far
broader
array
qualifications
characteristics
racial
ethnic
origin
single
though
important
element
ibid
wake
fractured
decision
bakke
courts
struggled
discern
whether
justice
powell
diversity
rationale
set
forth
part
opinion
joined
justice
nonetheless
binding
precedent
marks
case
explained
hen
fragmented
decides
case
single
rationale
explaining
result
enjoys
assent
five
justices
holding
may
viewed
position
taken
members
concurred
judgments
narrowest
grounds
compare
johnson
board
regents
univ
justice
powell
diversity
rationale
holding
hopwood
texas
hopwood
ii
hopwood
smith
university
law
school
justice
powell
opinion
including
diversity
rationale
controlling
marks
find
necessary
decide
whether
justice
powell
opinion
binding
marks
seem
useful
pursue
marks
inquiry
utmost
logical
possibility
obviously
baffled
divided
lower
courts
considered
nichols
supra
important
reasons
set
today
endorse
justice
powell
view
student
body
diversity
compelling
state
interest
justify
use
race
university
admissions
equal
protection
clause
provides
state
shall
deny
person
within
jurisdiction
equal
protection
laws
amdt
fourteenth
amendment
protect
persons
groups
governmental
action
based
race
group
classification
long
recognized
circumstances
irrelevant
therefore
prohibited
subjected
detailed
judicial
inquiry
ensure
personal
right
equal
protection
laws
infringed
adarand
constructors
peña
emphasis
original
internal
quotation
marks
citation
omitted
free
people
whose
institutions
founded
upon
doctrine
equality
loving
virginia
internal
quotation
marks
citation
omitted
follows
principle
government
may
treat
people
differently
race
compelling
reasons
adarand
constructors
peña
held
racial
classifications
imposed
government
must
analyzed
reviewing
strict
scrutiny
ibid
means
classifications
constitutional
narrowly
tailored
compelling
governmental
interests
absent
searching
judicial
inquiry
justification
measures
way
determine
classifications
classifications
fact
motivated
illegitimate
notions
racial
inferiority
simple
racial
politics
richmond
croson
plurality
opinion
apply
strict
scrutiny
racial
classifications
illegitimate
uses
race
assuring
government
pursuing
goal
important
enough
warrant
use
highly
suspect
tool
ibid
strict
scrutiny
strict
theory
fatal
fact
adarand
constructors
peña
supra
internal
quotation
marks
citation
omitted
although
governmental
uses
race
subject
strict
scrutiny
invalidated
explained
whenever
government
treats
person
unequally
race
person
suffered
injury
falls
squarely
within
language
spirit
constitution
guarantee
equal
protection
observation
says
nothing
ultimate
validity
particular
law
determination
job
applying
strict
scrutiny
action
necessary
compelling
governmental
interest
action
violate
constitutional
guarantee
equal
protection
long
requirement
also
satisfied
context
matters
reviewing
governmental
action
equal
protection
clause
see
gomillion
lightfoot
admonishing
dealing
claims
broad
provisions
constitution
derive
content
interpretive
process
inclusion
exclusion
imperative
generalizations
based
qualified
concrete
situations
gave
rise
must
applied
context
disregard
variant
controlling
facts
adarand
constructors
peña
made
clear
strict
scrutiny
must
take
differences
account
indeed
explained
fundamental
purpose
ibid
every
decision
influenced
race
equally
objectionable
strict
scrutiny
designed
provide
framework
carefully
examining
importance
sincerity
reasons
advanced
governmental
decisionmaker
use
race
particular
context
iii
principles
mind
turn
question
whether
law
school
use
race
justified
compelling
state
interest
throughout
litigation
respondents
assert
one
justification
use
race
admissions
process
obtaining
educational
benefits
flow
diverse
student
body
brief
respondents
bollinger
et
al
words
law
school
asks
us
recognize
context
higher
education
compelling
state
interest
student
body
diversity
first
wish
dispel
notion
law
school
argument
foreclosed
either
expressly
implicitly
cases
decided
since
bakke
true
language
opinions
might
read
suggest
remedying
past
discrimination
permissible
justification
governmental
action
see
richmond
croson
supra
plurality
opinion
stating
unless
classifications
based
race
strictly
reserved
remedial
settings
may
fact
promote
notions
racial
inferiority
lead
politics
racial
hostility
never
held
governmental
use
race
survive
strict
scrutiny
remedying
past
discrimination
since
bakke
directly
addressed
use
race
context
public
higher
education
today
hold
law
school
compelling
interest
attaining
diverse
student
body
law
school
educational
judgment
diversity
essential
educational
mission
one
defer
law
school
assessment
diversity
fact
yield
educational
benefits
substantiated
respondents
amici
scrutiny
interest
asserted
law
school
less
strict
taking
account
complex
educational
judgments
area
lies
primarily
within
expertise
university
holding
today
keeping
tradition
giving
degree
deference
university
academic
decisions
within
constitutionally
prescribed
limits
see
regents
univ
ewing
board
curators
univ
mo
horowitz
bakke
opinion
powell
long
recognized
given
important
purpose
public
education
expansive
freedoms
speech
thought
associated
university
environment
universities
occupy
special
niche
constitutional
tradition
see
wieman
updegraff
frankfurter
concurring
sweezy
new
hampshire
shelton
tucker
keyishian
board
regents
univ
state
announcing
principle
student
body
diversity
compelling
state
interest
justice
powell
invoked
cases
recognizing
constitutional
dimension
grounded
first
amendment
educational
autonomy
freedom
university
make
judgments
education
includes
selection
student
body
bakke
supra
premise
justice
powell
reasoned
claiming
right
select
students
contribute
exchange
ideas
university
seek
achieve
goal
paramount
importance
fulfillment
mission
quoting
keyishian
board
regents
univ
state
supra
conclusion
law
school
compelling
interest
diverse
student
body
informed
view
attaining
diverse
student
body
heart
law
school
proper
institutional
mission
good
faith
part
university
presumed
absent
showing
contrary
part
goal
assembling
class
exceptionally
academically
qualified
broadly
diverse
law
school
seeks
enroll
mass
minority
students
brief
respondents
bollinger
et
al
law
school
interest
simply
assure
within
student
body
specified
percentage
particular
group
merely
race
ethnic
origin
bakke
racial
balance
achieved
sake
richmond
croson
rather
law
school
concept
critical
mass
defined
reference
educational
benefits
diversity
designed
produce
benefits
substantial
district
emphasized
law
school
admissions
policy
promotes
understanding
helps
break
racial
stereotypes
enables
students
better
understand
persons
different
races
app
pet
cert
benefits
important
laudable
classroom
discussion
livelier
spirited
simply
enlightening
interesting
students
greatest
possible
variety
backgrounds
law
school
claim
compelling
interest
bolstered
amici
point
educational
benefits
flow
student
body
diversity
addition
expert
studies
reports
entered
evidence
trial
numerous
studies
show
student
body
diversity
promotes
learning
outcomes
better
prepares
students
increasingly
diverse
workforce
society
better
prepares
professionals
brief
american
educational
research
association
et
al
amici
curiae
see
bowen
bok
shape
river
diversity
challenged
evidence
impact
affirmative
action
orfield
kurlaender
eds
compelling
interest
examining
evidence
racial
dynamics
colleges
universities
chang
witt
jones
hakuta
eds
benefits
theoretical
real
major
american
businesses
made
clear
skills
needed
today
increasingly
global
marketplace
developed
exposure
widely
diverse
people
cultures
ideas
viewpoints
brief
et
al
amici
curiae
brief
general
motors
amicus
curiae
retired
officers
civilian
leaders
military
assert
ased
decades
experience
highly
qualified
racially
diverse
officer
corps
essential
military
ability
fulfill
principle
mission
provide
national
security
brief
julius
becton
et
al
amici
curiae
primary
sources
nation
officer
corps
service
academies
reserve
officers
training
corps
rotc
latter
comprising
students
already
admitted
participating
colleges
universities
present
military
achieve
officer
corps
highly
qualified
racially
diverse
unless
service
academies
rotc
used
limited
recruiting
admissions
policies
ibid
emphasis
original
fulfill
mission
military
must
selective
admissions
training
education
officer
corps
must
train
educate
highly
qualified
racially
diverse
officer
corps
racially
diverse
setting
emphasis
original
agree
requires
small
step
analysis
conclude
country
selective
institutions
must
remain
diverse
selective
ibid
repeatedly
acknowledged
overriding
importance
preparing
students
work
citizenship
describing
education
pivotal
sustaining
political
cultural
heritage
fundamental
role
maintaining
fabric
society
plyler
doe
long
recognized
education
foundation
good
citizenship
brown
board
education
reason
diffusion
knowledge
opportunity
public
institutions
higher
education
must
accessible
individuals
regardless
race
ethnicity
amicus
curiae
affirms
nsuring
public
institutions
open
available
segments
american
society
including
people
races
ethnicities
represents
paramount
government
objective
brief
amicus
curiae
owhere
importance
openness
acute
context
higher
education
ibid
effective
participation
members
racial
ethnic
groups
civic
life
nation
essential
dream
one
nation
indivisible
realized
moreover
universities
particular
law
schools
represent
training
ground
large
number
nation
leaders
sweatt
painter
describing
law
school
proving
ground
legal
learning
practice
individuals
law
degrees
occupy
roughly
half
state
governorships
half
seats
senate
third
seats
house
representatives
see
brief
association
american
law
schools
amicus
curiae
pattern
even
striking
comes
highly
selective
law
schools
handful
schools
accounts
senators
courts
appeals
judges
nearly
district
judges
order
cultivate
set
leaders
legitimacy
eyes
citizenry
necessary
path
leadership
visibly
open
talented
qualified
individuals
every
race
ethnicity
members
heterogeneous
society
must
confidence
openness
integrity
educational
institutions
provide
training
recognized
law
schools
effective
isolation
individuals
institutions
law
interacts
see
sweatt
painter
supra
access
legal
education
thus
legal
profession
must
inclusive
talented
qualified
individuals
every
race
ethnicity
members
heterogeneous
society
may
participate
educational
institutions
provide
training
education
necessary
succeed
america
law
school
premise
need
critical
mass
belief
minority
students
always
even
consistently
express
characteristic
minority
viewpoint
issue
brief
respondent
bollinger
et
al
contrary
diminishing
force
stereotypes
crucial
part
law
school
mission
one
accomplish
token
numbers
minority
students
growing
particular
region
particular
professional
experiences
likely
affect
individual
views
one
unique
experience
racial
minority
society
like
race
unfortunately
still
matters
law
school
determined
based
experience
expertise
critical
mass
underrepresented
minorities
necessary
compelling
interest
securing
educational
benefits
diverse
student
body
even
limited
circumstance
drawing
racial
distinctions
permissible
compelling
state
interest
government
still
constrained
may
pursue
end
means
chosen
accomplish
government
asserted
purpose
must
specifically
narrowly
framed
accomplish
purpose
shaw
hunt
internal
quotation
marks
citation
omitted
purpose
narrow
tailoring
requirement
ensure
means
chosen
th
compelling
goal
closely
little
possibility
motive
classification
illegitimate
racial
prejudice
stereotype
richmond
croson
plurality
opinion
since
bakke
occasion
define
contours
inquiry
respect
university
admissions
programs
inquiry
must
calibrated
fit
distinct
issues
raised
use
race
achieve
student
body
diversity
public
higher
education
contrary
justice
kennedy
assertions
abandon
strict
scrutiny
see
post
dissenting
opinion
rather
already
explained
ante
adhere
adarand
teaching
purpose
strict
scrutiny
take
relevant
differences
account
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
narrowly
tailored
admissions
program
use
quota
system
insulat
category
applicants
certain
desired
qualifications
competition
applicants
bakke
supra
opinion
powell
instead
university
may
consider
race
ethnicity
particular
applicant
file
without
insulat
ing
individual
comparison
candidates
available
seats
words
admissions
program
must
flexible
enough
consider
pertinent
elements
diversity
light
particular
qualifications
applicant
place
footing
consideration
although
necessarily
according
weight
ibid
find
law
school
admissions
program
bears
hallmarks
narrowly
tailored
plan
justice
powell
made
clear
bakke
truly
individualized
consideration
demands
race
used
flexible
nonmechanical
way
follows
mandate
universities
establish
quotas
members
certain
racial
groups
put
members
groups
separate
admissions
tracks
see
universities
insulate
applicants
belong
certain
racial
ethnic
groups
competition
admission
ibid
universities
however
consider
race
ethnicity
flexibly
plus
factor
context
individualized
consideration
every
applicant
ibid
satisfied
law
school
admissions
program
like
harvard
plan
described
justice
powell
operate
quota
properly
understood
quota
program
certain
fixed
number
proportion
opportunities
reserved
exclusively
certain
minority
groups
richmond
croson
supra
plurality
opinion
quotas
fixed
number
percentage
must
attained
exceeded
sheet
metal
workers
eeoc
concurring
part
dissenting
part
insulate
individual
comparison
candidates
available
seats
bakke
supra
opinion
powell
contrast
permissible
goal
require
effort
come
within
range
demarcated
goal
sheet
metal
workers
eeoc
supra
permits
consideration
race
plus
factor
given
case
still
ensuring
candidate
compete
qualified
applicants
johnson
transportation
agency
santa
clara
justice
powell
distinction
medical
school
rigid
quota
harvard
flexible
use
race
plus
factor
instructive
harvard
certainly
minimum
goals
minority
enrollment
even
specific
number
firmly
mind
see
bakke
supra
opinion
powell
black
students
begin
bring
classmates
variety
points
view
backgrounds
experiences
blacks
justice
powell
flatly
rejected
argument
harvard
program
functional
equivalent
quota
merely
race
gave
greater
weight
race
factors
order
achieve
student
body
diversity
law
school
goal
attaining
critical
mass
underrepresented
minority
students
transform
program
quota
harvard
plan
described
justice
powell
recognized
course
relationship
numbers
achieving
benefits
derived
diverse
student
body
numbers
providing
reasonable
environment
students
admitted
ome
attention
numbers
without
transform
flexible
admissions
system
rigid
quota
ibid
justice
kennedy
posits
law
school
consultation
daily
reports
keep
track
racial
ethnic
composition
class
well
residency
gender
suggest
attempt
individual
review
save
race
final
stages
admissions
process
see
post
dissenting
opinion
contrary
law
school
admissions
officers
testified
without
contradiction
never
gave
race
less
weight
based
information
contained
reports
brief
respondents
bollinger
et
al
citing
app
nos
moreover
justice
kennedy
concedes
see
post
number
latino
students
class
law
school
varied
percent
range
inconsistent
quota
chief
justice
believes
law
school
policy
conceals
attempt
achieve
racial
balancing
cites
admissions
data
contend
law
school
discriminates
among
different
groups
within
critical
mass
post
dissenting
opinion
chief
justice
concedes
number
underrepresented
minority
students
ultimately
enroll
law
school
differs
substantially
representation
applicant
pool
varies
considerably
group
year
year
see
post
dissenting
opinion
admissions
program
operate
quota
satisfy
requirement
individualized
consideration
using
race
plus
factor
university
admissions
university
admissions
program
must
remain
flexible
enough
ensure
applicant
evaluated
individual
way
makes
applicant
race
ethnicity
defining
feature
application
importance
individualized
consideration
context
admissions
program
paramount
see
bakke
supra
opinion
powell
identifying
denial
th
right
individualized
consideration
principal
evil
medical
school
admissions
program
law
school
engages
highly
individualized
holistic
review
applicant
file
giving
serious
consideration
ways
applicant
might
contribute
diverse
educational
environment
law
school
affords
individualized
consideration
applicants
races
policy
either
de
jure
de
facto
automatic
acceptance
rejection
based
single
soft
variable
unlike
program
issue
gratz
bollinger
ante
law
school
awards
mechanical
predetermined
diversity
bonuses
based
race
ethnicity
see
ante
distinguishing
admissions
program
automatically
awards
points
based
race
harvard
plan
considered
race
contemplate
single
characteristic
automatically
ensured
specific
identifiable
contribution
university
diversity
like
harvard
plan
law
school
admissions
policy
flexible
enough
consider
pertinent
elements
diversity
light
particular
qualifications
applicant
place
footing
consideration
although
necessarily
according
weight
bakke
supra
opinion
powell
also
find
like
harvard
plan
justice
powell
referenced
bakke
law
school
admissions
program
adequately
ensures
factors
may
contribute
student
body
diversity
meaningfully
considered
alongside
race
admissions
decisions
respect
use
race
underrepresented
minority
students
admitted
law
school
deemed
qualified
virtue
nation
struggle
racial
inequality
students
likely
experiences
particular
importance
law
school
mission
less
likely
admitted
meaningful
numbers
criteria
ignore
experiences
see
app
law
school
however
limit
way
broad
range
qualities
experiences
may
considered
valuable
contributions
student
body
diversity
contrary
policy
makes
clear
many
possible
bases
diversity
admissions
provides
examples
admittees
lived
traveled
widely
abroad
fluent
several
languages
overcome
personal
adversity
family
hardship
exceptional
records
extensive
community
service
successful
careers
fields
law
school
seriously
considers
applicant
promise
making
notable
contribution
class
way
particular
strength
attainment
characteristic
unusual
intellectual
achievement
employment
experience
nonacademic
performance
personal
background
applicants
opportunity
highlight
potential
diversity
contributions
submission
personal
statement
letters
recommendation
essay
describing
ways
applicant
contribute
life
diversity
law
school
law
school
actually
gives
substantial
weight
diversity
factors
besides
race
law
school
frequently
accepts
nonminority
applicants
grades
test
scores
lower
underrepresented
minority
applicants
nonminority
applicants
rejected
see
brief
respondents
bollinger
et
al
app
shows
law
school
seriously
weighs
many
diversity
factors
besides
race
make
real
dispositive
difference
nonminority
applicants
well
flexible
approach
law
school
sufficiently
takes
account
practice
well
theory
wide
variety
characteristics
besides
race
ethnicity
contribute
diverse
student
body
justice
kennedy
speculates
race
likely
outcome
determinative
many
members
minority
groups
fall
within
upper
range
lsat
scores
grades
post
dissenting
opinion
said
harvard
plan
discussed
approvingly
justice
powell
bakke
indeed
plan
uses
race
one
many
factors
see
committee
admissions
reviews
large
middle
group
applicants
admissible
deemed
capable
good
work
courses
race
applicant
may
tip
balance
petitioner
argue
law
school
plan
narrowly
tailored
means
exist
obtain
educational
benefits
student
body
diversity
law
school
seeks
disagree
narrow
tailoring
require
exhaustion
every
conceivable
alternative
require
university
choose
maintaining
reputation
excellence
fulfilling
commitment
provide
educational
opportunities
members
racial
groups
see
wygant
jackson
bd
alternatives
must
serve
interest
richmond
croson
plurality
opinion
city
whole
array
alternatives
changing
requirements
little
detrimental
effect
city
interests
narrow
tailoring
however
require
serious
good
faith
consideration
workable
alternatives
achieve
diversity
university
seeks
see
plan
narrowly
tailored
appear
consideration
use
means
wygant
jackson
bd
supra
narrow
tailoring
require
consideration
lawful
alternative
less
restrictive
means
agree
appeals
law
school
sufficiently
considered
workable
alternatives
district
took
law
school
task
failing
consider
alternatives
using
lottery
system
decreasing
emphasis
applicants
undergraduate
gpa
lsat
scores
app
pet
cert
alternatives
require
dramatic
sacrifice
diversity
academic
quality
admitted
students
law
school
current
admissions
program
considers
race
one
factor
among
many
effort
assemble
student
body
diverse
ways
broader
race
lottery
make
kind
nuanced
judgment
impossible
effectively
sacrifice
educational
values
mention
every
kind
diversity
suggestion
law
school
simply
lower
admissions
standards
students
drastic
remedy
require
law
school
become
much
different
institution
sacrifice
vital
component
educational
mission
advocates
percentage
plans
recently
adopted
public
undergraduate
institutions
texas
florida
california
guarantee
admission
students
certain
threshold
every
high
school
state
brief
amicus
curiae
however
explain
plans
work
graduate
professional
schools
even
assuming
plans
may
preclude
university
conducting
individualized
assessments
necessary
assemble
student
body
racially
diverse
diverse
along
qualities
valued
university
satisfied
law
school
adequately
considered
alternatives
currently
capable
producing
critical
mass
without
forcing
law
school
abandon
academic
selectivity
cornerstone
educational
mission
acknowledge
serious
problems
justice
connected
idea
preference
bakke
dissenting
satisfied
law
school
admissions
program
law
school
considers
pertinent
elements
diversity
select
nonminority
applicants
greater
potential
enhance
student
body
diversity
underrepresented
minority
applicants
see
bakke
supra
opinion
powell
justice
powell
recognized
bakke
long
admissions
program
uses
race
plus
factor
context
individualized
consideration
rejected
applicant
foreclosed
consideration
seat
simply
right
color
wrong
surname
qualifications
weighed
fairly
competitively
basis
complain
unequal
treatment
fourteenth
amendment
agree
context
individualized
inquiry
possible
diversity
contributions
applicants
law
school
admissions
program
unduly
harm
nonminority
applicants
mindful
however
core
purpose
fourteenth
amendment
away
governmentally
imposed
discrimination
based
race
palmore
sidoti
accordingly
admissions
policies
must
limited
time
requirement
reflects
racial
classifications
however
compelling
goals
potentially
dangerous
may
employed
broadly
interest
demands
enshrining
permanent
justification
racial
preferences
offend
fundamental
equal
protection
principle
see
reason
exempt
admissions
programs
requirement
governmental
use
race
must
logical
end
point
law
school
concedes
programs
must
reasonable
durational
limits
brief
respondents
bollinger
et
al
context
higher
education
durational
requirement
met
sunset
provisions
admissions
policies
periodic
reviews
determine
whether
racial
preferences
still
necessary
achieve
student
body
diversity
universities
california
florida
washington
state
racial
preferences
admissions
prohibited
state
law
currently
engaged
experimenting
wide
variety
alternative
approaches
universities
draw
promising
aspects
alternatives
develop
cf
lopez
kennedy
concurring
may
perform
role
laboratories
experimentation
devise
various
solutions
best
solution
far
clear
requirement
admissions
programs
termination
point
assure
citizens
deviation
norm
equal
treatment
racial
ethnic
groups
temporary
matter
measure
taken
service
goal
equality
richmond
croson
plurality
opinion
see
also
nathanson
bartnik
constitutionality
preferential
treatment
minority
applicants
professional
schools
chicago
bar
rec
sad
day
indeed
america
become
society
identifiable
minority
assigned
proportional
representation
every
desirable
walk
life
rationale
programs
preferential
treatment
acid
test
justification
efficacy
eliminating
need
racial
ethnic
preferences
take
law
school
word
like
nothing
better
find
admissions
formula
terminate
admissions
program
soon
practicable
see
brief
respondents
bollinger
et
al
bakke
supra
opinion
powell
presuming
good
faith
university
officials
absence
showing
contrary
years
since
justice
powell
first
approved
use
race
interest
student
body
diversity
context
public
higher
education
since
time
number
minority
applicants
high
grades
test
scores
indeed
increased
see
tr
oral
arg
expect
years
use
racial
preferences
longer
necessary
interest
approved
today
iv
summary
equal
protection
clause
prohibit
law
school
narrowly
tailored
use
race
admissions
decisions
compelling
interest
obtaining
educational
benefits
flow
diverse
student
body
consequently
petitioner
statutory
claims
based
title
vi
also
fail
see
bakke
supra
opinion
powell
title
vi
proscribe
racial
classifications
violate
equal
protection
clause
fifth
amendment
general
building
contractors
pennsylvania
prohibition
discrimination
equal
protection
clause
judgment
appeals
sixth
circuit
accordingly
affirmed
ordered
barbara
grutter
petitioner
lee
bollinger
et
al
writ
certiorari
appeals
sixth
circuit
june
justice
ginsburg
justice
breyer
joins
concurring
observation
programs
must
logical
end
point
ante
accords
international
understanding
office
affirmative
action
international
convention
elimination
forms
racial
discrimination
ratified
see
state
treaties
force
june
endorses
special
concrete
measures
ensure
adequate
development
protection
certain
racial
groups
individuals
belonging
purpose
guaranteeing
full
equal
enjoyment
human
rights
fundamental
freedoms
annex
res
gaor
res
supp
doc
art
measures
convention
instructs
shall
case
entail
consequence
maintenance
unequal
separate
rights
different
racial
groups
objectives
taken
achieved
ibid
see
also
art
similarly
providing
temporally
limited
affirmative
action
convention
elimination
forms
discrimination
women
annex
res
gaor
res
supp
doc
art
authorizing
temporary
special
measures
aimed
accelerating
de
facto
equality
shall
discontinued
objectives
equality
opportunity
treatment
achieved
observes
years
since
justice
powell
regents
univ
cal
bakke
first
approved
use
race
interest
student
body
diversity
context
public
higher
education
ante
least
part
time
however
law
fairly
described
settled
regions
nation
overtly
admissions
policies
proscribed
see
hopwood
texas
cf
wessmann
gittens
tuttle
arlington
cty
school
johnson
board
regents
univ
moreover
years
bakke
declared
public
school
segregation
unconstitutional
declaration
prolonged
resistance
yielded
end
racial
caste
system
legacy
centuries
slavery
see
brown
board
education
cf
cooper
aaron
well
documented
conscious
unconscious
race
bias
even
rank
discrimination
based
race
remain
alive
land
impeding
realization
highest
values
ideals
see
gratz
bollinger
ante
ginsburg
dissenting
adarand
constructors
peña
ginsburg
dissenting
krieger
civil
rights
perestroika
intergroup
relations
affirmative
action
rev
public
education
data
years
show
children
hispanic
children
attended
school
minorities
made
majority
student
body
see
frankenberg
lee
orfield
multiracial
society
segregated
schools
losing
dream
http
research
visited
june
available
clerk
case
file
schools
predominantly
minority
communities
lag
far
behind
others
measured
educational
resources
available
see
brief
national
urban
league
et
al
amici
curiae
citing
general
accounting
office
spending
differences
selected
inner
city
suburban
schools
varied
metropolitan
area
however
strong
public
desire
improved
education
systems
may
see
hart
teeter
national
priority
americans
speak
teacher
quality
public
opinion
research
conducted
educational
testing
service
child
left
behind
act
pub
stat
supp
pamphlet
remains
current
reality
many
minority
students
encounter
markedly
inadequate
unequal
educational
opportunities
despite
inequalities
minority
students
able
meet
high
threshold
requirements
set
admission
country
finest
undergraduate
graduate
educational
institutions
lower
school
education
minority
communities
improves
increase
number
students
may
anticipated
today
vantage
point
one
may
hope
firmly
forecast
next
generation
span
progress
toward
nondiscrimination
genuinely
equal
opportunity
make
safe
sunset
affirmative
action
barbara
grutter
petitioner
lee
bollinger
et
al
writ
certiorari
appeals
sixth
circuit
june
chief
justice
rehnquist
justice
scalia
justice
kennedy
justice
thomas
join
dissenting
agree
limited
circumstance
drawing
racial
distinctions
permissible
government
must
ensure
means
narrowly
tailored
achieve
compelling
state
interest
ante
see
also
fullilove
klutznick
powell
concurring
ven
government
proffers
compelling
interest
support
reliance
upon
suspect
classification
means
selected
must
narrowly
drawn
fulfill
governmental
purpose
believe
however
university
michigan
law
school
law
school
means
narrowly
tailored
interest
asserts
law
school
claims
must
take
steps
achieve
underrepresented
minority
students
brief
respondents
bollinger
et
al
actual
program
bears
relation
asserted
goal
stripped
critical
mass
veil
law
school
program
revealed
naked
effort
achieve
racial
balancing
explained
many
times
ny
preference
based
racial
ethnic
criteria
must
necessarily
receive
searching
examination
adarand
constructors
peña
quoting
wygant
jackson
bd
plurality
opinion
powell
cases
establish
order
withstand
demanding
inquiry
respondents
must
demonstrate
methods
using
race
compelling
state
interest
greater
precision
alternative
means
regents
univ
cal
bakke
opinion
powell
political
judgments
touch
upon
individual
race
ethnic
background
entitled
judicial
determination
burden
asked
bear
basis
precisely
tailored
serve
compelling
governmental
interest
decision
today
consistently
applied
strict
scrutiny
analysis
regardless
government
purported
reason
using
race
regardless
setting
race
used
rejected
calls
use
lenient
review
face
claims
race
used
good
faith
ore
good
motives
required
government
seeks
allocate
resources
way
explicit
racial
classification
system
adarand
supra
fullilove
supra
stevens
dissenting
racial
classifications
simply
pernicious
permit
exact
connection
justification
classification
likewise
rejected
calls
apply
lenient
review
based
particular
setting
race
used
indeed
even
specific
context
higher
education
emphasized
constitutional
limitations
protecting
individual
rights
may
disregarded
bakke
supra
although
recites
language
strict
scrutiny
analysis
application
review
unprecedented
deference
respondents
asserted
justification
law
school
use
race
admissions
process
obtaining
educational
benefits
flow
diverse
student
body
ante
quoting
brief
respondents
bollinger
et
al
contend
critical
mass
underrepresented
minorities
necessary
interest
ante
respondents
school
administrators
explain
generally
critical
mass
means
sufficient
number
underrepresented
minority
students
achieve
several
objectives
ensure
minority
students
feel
isolated
like
spokespersons
race
provide
adequate
opportunities
type
interaction
upon
educational
benefits
diversity
depend
challenge
students
think
critically
reexamine
stereotypes
see
app
pet
cert
brief
respondents
bollinger
et
al
objectives
indicate
critical
mass
relates
size
student
body
claiming
law
school
enrolled
critical
mass
enough
minority
students
provide
meaningful
integration
classrooms
residence
halls
respondents
claim
law
school
achieving
critical
mass
noting
law
school
goals
greatly
furthered
presence
mass
minority
students
student
body
practice
law
school
program
bears
little
relation
asserted
goal
achieving
critical
mass
respondents
explain
law
school
seeks
accumulate
critical
mass
underrepresented
minority
group
see
law
school
current
policy
provide
special
commitment
enrolling
mass
record
demonstrates
law
school
admissions
practices
respect
groups
differ
dramatically
defended
consistent
use
term
critical
mass
law
school
admitted
students
native
american
hispanic
law
school
admitting
order
achieve
critical
mass
thereby
preventing
students
feeling
isolated
like
spokespersons
race
one
think
number
order
magnitude
necessary
accomplish
purpose
hispanics
native
americans
similarly
even
native
american
applicants
admitted
given
year
matriculate
record
demonstrates
case
possibly
constitute
critical
mass
native
americans
class
students
order
pattern
admission
consistent
law
school
explanation
critical
mass
one
believe
objectives
critical
mass
offered
respondents
achieved
half
number
hispanics
number
native
americans
compared
respondents
offer
reasons
disparities
instead
simply
emphasize
importance
achieving
critical
mass
without
explanation
concept
applied
differently
among
three
underrepresented
minority
groups
different
numbers
moreover
come
result
substantially
different
treatment
among
three
underrepresented
minority
groups
apparent
example
offered
law
school
highlighted
school
asserts
frequently
accepts
nonminority
applicants
grades
test
scores
lower
underrepresented
minority
applicants
nonminority
applicants
rejected
ante
citing
brief
respondents
bollinger
et
al
specifically
law
school
minority
applicants
rejected
least
grade
point
average
gpa
score
higher
law
school
admissions
test
lsat
number
caucasian
applicants
similar
lower
scores
admitted
brief
respondents
bollinger
et
al
review
record
reveals
individuals
individuals
hispanic
native
american
discrepancy
reflects
consistent
practice
example
hispanics
scored
lsat
earned
gpa
higher
applied
admission
admitted
app
meanwhile
range
qualifications
applied
admission
admitted
likewise
year
hispanics
scored
lsat
earned
higher
applied
admission
applicants
admitted
similarly
qualified
applied
admission
admitted
statistics
significant
bearing
petitioner
case
respondents
never
offered
arguments
explaining
significantly
individuals
one
underrepresented
minority
group
needed
order
achieve
critical
mass
student
body
diversity
certainly
explained
hispanics
said
among
groups
isolated
racial
barriers
country
admission
capped
manner
brief
respondents
bollinger
et
al
true
petitioner
neither
hispanic
native
american
law
school
disparate
admissions
practices
respect
minority
groups
demonstrate
alleged
goal
critical
mass
simply
sham
petitioner
may
use
statistics
expose
sham
basis
law
school
admission
less
qualified
underrepresented
minorities
preference
surely
strict
scrutiny
permit
sort
disparities
without
least
explanation
critical
mass
label
discarded
likely
explanation
numbers
emerge
law
school
goal
attaining
critical
mass
underrepresented
minority
students
interest
merely
ing
within
student
body
specified
percentage
particular
group
merely
race
ethnic
origin
ante
quoting
bakke
opinion
powell
recognizes
interest
amount
outright
racial
balancing
patently
unconstitutional
ante
concludes
however
law
school
use
race
admissions
consistent
justice
powell
opinion
bakke
pays
ome
attention
numbers
ante
quoting
bakke
supra
correlation
percentage
law
school
pool
applicants
members
three
minority
groups
percentage
admitted
applicants
members
groups
far
precise
dismissed
merely
result
school
paying
attention
numbers
tables
show
percentage
admitted
applicants
members
minority
groups
closely
tracked
percentage
individuals
school
applicant
pool
groups
table
year
number
law
school
applicants
number
american
applicants
applicants
number
applicants
admitted
law
school
number
applicants
admitted
admitted
applicants
american
table
year
number
law
school
applicants
number
hispanic
applicants
applicants
hispanic
number
applicants
admitted
law
school
number
hispanic
applicants
admitted
admitted
applicants
hispanic
table
year
number
law
school
applicants
number
native
american
applicants
applicants
native
american
number
applicants
admitted
law
school
number
native
american
applicants
admitted
admitted
applicants
native
american
example
applicant
pool
admitted
class
applicant
pool
admitted
class
correlation
striking
respondents
emphasize
number
underrepresented
minority
students
admitted
law
school
significantly
smaller
race
applicant
considered
see
app
pet
cert
brief
respondents
bollinger
et
al
quoting
app
pet
cert
bollinger
et
al
examples
illustrate
measure
decrease
differ
dramatically
among
groups
tight
correlation
percentage
applicants
admittees
given
race
therefore
must
result
careful
race
based
planning
law
school
suggests
formula
admission
based
aspirational
assumption
applicants
equally
qualified
academically
therefore
proportion
group
admitted
proportion
group
applicant
pool
see
brief
respondents
bollinger
et
al
discussing
admissions
officers
use
periodic
reports
track
racial
composition
developing
class
respondents
fail
explain
phenomenon
attempt
obscure
see
law
school
minority
enrollment
percentages
diverged
percentages
applicant
pool
much
divergence
percentages
underrepresented
minorities
applicant
pool
enrolled
classes
relevant
comparison
fact
may
relevant
comparison
law
school
precisely
control
admitted
applicants
decide
attend
university
numbers
demonstrate
clearly
employ
racial
preferences
extending
offers
admission
indeed
ostensibly
flexible
nature
law
school
admissions
program
finds
appealing
see
ante
appears
practice
carefully
managed
program
designed
ensure
proportionate
representation
applicants
selected
minority
groups
believe
constitution
gives
law
school
free
rein
use
race
law
school
offered
explanation
actual
admissions
practices
unexplained
bound
conclude
law
school
managed
admissions
program
achieve
critical
mass
extend
offers
admission
members
selected
minority
groups
proportion
statistical
representation
applicant
pool
precisely
type
racial
balancing
calls
patently
unconstitutional
ante
finally
believe
law
school
program
fails
strict
scrutiny
devoid
reasonably
precise
time
limit
law
school
use
race
admissions
emphasized
consider
planned
duration
remedy
determining
whether
program
constitutional
fullilove
determining
whether
remedies
appropriate
look
several
factors
including
duration
relief
previous
cases
required
limit
duration
programs
discrimination
basis
race
invidious
suggests
possible
limitation
law
school
current
program
see
ante
respondents
hand
remain
ambiguous
explaining
law
school
course
recognizes
programs
must
reasonable
durational
limits
sixth
circuit
properly
found
limit
law
school
resolve
cease
considering
race
genuine
alternatives
become
available
brief
respondents
bollinger
et
al
discussions
time
limit
vaguest
assurances
truth
permit
law
school
use
racial
preferences
seemingly
permanent
basis
thus
important
component
strict
scrutiny
program
limited
time
casually
subverted
unprecedented
display
deference
strict
scrutiny
analysis
upholds
law
school
program
despite
obvious
flaws
said
comes
use
race
connection
ends
means
used
attain
must
precise
flaw
deeper
merely
question
fit
ends
means
means
actually
used
forbidden
equal
protection
clause
constitution
barbara
grutter
petitioner
lee
bollinger
et
al
writ
certiorari
appeals
sixth
circuit
june
justice
kennedy
dissenting
separate
opinion
justice
powell
regents
univ
cal
bakke
based
principle
university
admissions
program
may
take
account
race
one
nonpredominant
factor
system
designed
consider
applicant
individual
provided
program
meet
test
strict
scrutiny
judiciary
unitary
formulation
strict
scrutiny
abandoned
manipulated
distort
real
accepted
meaning
lacks
authority
approve
use
race
even
modest
limited
way
opinion
justice
powell
view
correct
rule
resolving
case
however
apply
strict
scrutiny
trying
say
otherwise
undermines
test
controlling
precedents
justice
powell
approval
use
race
university
admissions
reflected
tradition
grounded
first
amendment
acknowledging
university
conception
educational
mission
bakke
supra
ante
precedents
provide
basis
acceptance
university
considered
judgment
racial
diversity
among
students
educational
task
supported
empirical
evidence
ante
unfortunate
however
takes
first
part
justice
powell
rule
abandons
second
approved
use
race
factor
admissions
process
majority
proceeds
nullify
essential
safeguard
justice
powell
insisted
upon
precondition
approval
safeguard
rigorous
judicial
review
strict
scrutiny
controlling
standard
bakke
supra
racial
ethnic
distinctions
sort
inherently
suspect
thus
call
exacting
judicial
examination
reaffirmed
subsequent
bakke
absolute
necessity
strict
scrutiny
state
uses
race
operative
category
adarand
constructors
peña
ny
person
whatever
race
right
demand
governmental
actor
subject
constitution
justify
racial
classification
subjecting
person
unequal
treatment
strictest
judicial
scrutiny
richmond
croson
see
kennedy
concurring
part
concurring
judgment
ny
racial
preference
must
face
rigorous
scrutiny
courts
confuses
deference
university
definition
educational
objective
deference
implementation
goal
context
university
admissions
objective
racial
diversity
accepted
based
empirical
data
known
us
deference
given
respect
methods
pursued
preferment
race
resorted
state
divisive
policies
containing
within
potential
destroy
confidence
constitution
idea
equality
majority
today
refuses
faithful
settled
principle
strict
review
designed
reflect
concerns
review
nothing
short
perfunctory
accepts
university
michigan
law
school
assurances
admissions
process
meets
constitutional
requirements
majority
fails
confront
reality
law
school
admissions
policy
implemented
dissenting
opinion
chief
justice
join
full
demonstrates
beyond
question
concept
critical
mass
delusion
used
law
school
mask
attempt
make
race
automatic
factor
instances
achieve
numerical
goals
indistinguishable
quotas
effort
achieve
racial
balance
among
minorities
school
seeks
attract
admission
patently
unconstitutional
ante
see
also
bakke
opinion
powell
remains
point
critical
mass
becomes
inconsistent
individual
consideration
specific
aspects
admissions
process
percent
places
entering
class
given
applicants
upper
range
law
school
admissions
test
scores
grades
applicant
credentials
likely
admitted
without
consideration
race
ethnicity
respect
remaining
percent
seats
race
likely
outcome
determinative
many
members
minority
groups
competition
becomes
tight
given
applicant
chance
admission
far
smaller
lacks
minority
status
point
numerical
concept
critical
mass
real
potential
compromise
individual
review
law
school
demonstrated
individual
consideration
preserved
stage
application
process
given
instruction
attain
calls
critical
mass
fact
evidence
shows
otherwise
little
deviation
among
admitted
minority
students
years
percentage
enrolled
minorities
fluctuated
number
minority
students
offers
extended
varied
slightly
greater
magnitude
high
low
district
relied
uncontested
fact
draw
inference
law
school
pursuit
critical
mass
mutated
equivalent
quota
supp
ed
admittedly
greater
fluctuations
among
enrolled
minorities
preceding
years
much
percentage
minority
offers
however
point
fell
historically
defined
law
school
bottom
critical
mass
range
greater
variance
earlier
years
event
dispel
suspicion
school
engaged
racial
balancing
data
consistent
inference
law
school
modified
target
twice
back
intervening
year
percentage
dropped
aberration
caused
school
miscalculation
many
applicants
offers
accept
redefinition
made
april
minority
groups
entitled
preference
see
brief
respondents
bollinger
et
al
year
percentage
enrolled
minority
students
narrow
fluctuation
band
raises
inference
law
school
subverted
individual
determination
strict
scrutiny
requires
law
school
overcome
inference
whether
objective
critical
mass
described
quota
goal
line
drawn
basis
race
ethnic
status
risks
compromising
individual
assessment
bakke
opinion
powell
respect
law
school
program
compares
unfavorably
experience
little
ivy
league
colleges
amicus
amherst
college
example
informs
us
offers
extended
students
background
period
ranged
offers
total
resulting
fluctuation
matriculated
students
class
see
brief
amherst
college
et
al
amici
curiae
law
school
insisted
upon
much
smaller
fluctuation
offers
extended
students
eventually
enrolled
despite
comparable
class
size
law
school
burden
proving
conformance
standard
strict
scrutiny
utilize
race
unconstitutional
way
adarand
constructors
least
constancy
admitted
minority
students
close
correlation
racial
breakdown
admitted
minorities
composition
applicant
pool
discussed
chief
justice
ante
require
law
school
either
produce
convincing
explanation
show
taken
adequate
steps
ensure
individual
assessment
law
school
neither
obvious
tension
pursuit
critical
mass
requirement
individual
review
increased
end
admissions
season
decisions
race
may
decide
outcome
made
period
see
supra
admissions
officers
consulted
daily
reports
indicated
composition
incoming
class
along
racial
lines
dennis
shields
director
admissions
stated
went
admissions
season
frequently
want
look
reports
see
change
reports
track
exactly
law
school
st
ood
given
time
assembling
class
tell
admissions
personnel
whether
short
assembling
critical
mass
minority
students
shields
generated
reports
law
school
admissions
policy
told
racial
entering
class
something
need
ed
concerned
find
way
tracking
going
consultation
daily
reports
last
stages
admissions
process
suggests
attempt
individual
review
save
race
admissions
officers
use
reports
recalibrate
plus
factor
given
race
depending
close
achieving
law
school
goal
critical
mass
bonus
factor
race
become
divorced
individual
review
premised
instead
numerical
objective
set
law
school
law
school
made
effort
guard
danger
provided
guidelines
admissions
personnel
reconcile
individual
assessment
directive
admit
critical
mass
minority
students
admissions
program
structured
eliminate
least
risk
promise
individual
evaluation
kept
daily
consideration
racial
breakdown
admitted
students
feature
programs
used
institutions
higher
learning
little
ivy
league
colleges
instance
keep
ongoing
tallies
racial
ethnic
composition
entering
students
see
brief
amherst
college
et
al
amici
curiae
constitutional
university
compelling
interest
diverse
student
body
must
achieved
system
individual
assessment
safeguarded
entire
process
constitutional
objection
goal
considering
race
one
modest
factor
among
many
others
achieve
diversity
educational
institution
must
ensure
sufficient
procedures
applicant
receives
individual
consideration
race
become
predominant
factor
admissions
decisionmaking
law
school
failed
comply
requirement
means
carried
burden
show
otherwise
test
strict
scrutiny
refusal
apply
meaningful
strict
scrutiny
lead
serious
consequences
deferring
law
schools
choice
minority
admissions
programs
courts
lose
talents
resources
faculties
administrators
devising
new
fairer
ways
ensure
individual
consideration
constant
rigorous
judicial
review
forces
law
school
faculties
undertake
responsibilities
state
employees
sensitive
areas
utmost
fidelity
mandate
constitution
dean
allan
stillwagon
directed
law
school
office
admissions
explained
difficulties
encountered
defining
racial
groups
entitled
benefit
school
affirmative
action
policy
testified
faculty
members
breathtakingly
cynical
deciding
qualify
member
underrepresented
minorities
example
offered
faculty
debate
whether
cubans
counted
hispanics
one
professor
objected
grounds
cubans
republicans
many
academics
law
schools
affirmative
action
forthright
defenders
readily
concede
diversity
merely
current
rationale
convenience
policy
prefer
justify
grounds
schuck
affirmative
action
past
present
future
yale
rev
citing
levinson
diversity
const
rubenfeld
affirmative
action
yale
suggest
faculty
michigan
law
schools
pursue
aspirations
consider
laudable
consistent
constitutional
traditions
evidence
necessity
scrutiny
real
feigned
corrosive
category
race
factor
decisionmaking
prospective
students
courts
public
demand
state
law
schools
prove
process
fair
constitutional
every
phase
implementation
difficult
assess
pronouncement
admissions
programs
unnecessary
years
ante
intended
mitigate
damage
concept
strict
scrutiny
neither
petitioners
rejected
law
school
applicants
find
solace
knowing
basic
protection
put
place
justice
powell
suspended
full
quarter
century
deference
antithetical
strict
scrutiny
consistent
interpretation
opinion
contains
mechanism
majority
abandonment
strict
scrutiny
undermines
objective
courts
apply
searching
standard
admissions
schemes
force
educational
institutions
seriously
explore
alternatives
contrast
willing
satisfied
law
school
profession
good
faith
majority
admits
much
take
law
school
word
nothing
better
find
admissions
formula
terminate
admissions
program
soon
practicable
ante
quoting
brief
respondent
bollinger
et
al
universities
given
latitude
administer
programs
tantamount
quotas
incentives
make
existing
minority
admissions
schemes
transparent
protective
individual
review
unhappy
consequence
perpetuate
hostilities
proper
consideration
race
designed
avoid
perpetuation
course
worst
outcomes
programs
exist
effective
bringing
harmony
mutual
respect
among
citizens
constitutional
tradition
always
sought
program
review
model
even
defaults
demanding
regrettable
important
holding
allowing
racial
minorities
special
circumstances
considered
order
improve
educational
opportunities
accompanied
suspension
strict
scrutiny
predicate
allowing
race
considered
first
place
abdicates
constitutional
duty
give
strict
scrutiny
use
race
university
admissions
negates
authority
approve
use
race
pursuit
student
diversity
constitution
confer
right
classify
basis
race
even
special
context
absent
searching
judicial
review
reasons
though
reiterate
approval
giving
appropriate
consideration
race
one
context
must
dissent
present
case
barbara
grutter
petitioner
lee
bollinger
et
al
writ
certiorari
appeals
sixth
circuit
june
justice
scalia
justice
thomas
joins
concurring
part
dissenting
part
join
opinion
chief
justice
demonstrates
university
michigan
law
school
mystical
critical
mass
justification
discrimination
race
challenges
even
gullible
mind
admissions
statistics
show
sham
cover
scheme
racially
proportionate
admissions
also
join
parts
vii
justice
thomas
opinion
find
particularly
unanswerable
central
point
allegedly
compelling
state
interest
issue
incremental
educational
benefit
emanates
fabled
critical
mass
minority
students
rather
michigan
interest
maintaining
prestige
law
school
whose
normal
admissions
standards
disproportionately
exclude
blacks
minorities
compelling
state
interest
everything
add
following
educational
benefit
university
michigan
seeks
achieve
racial
discrimination
consists
according
understanding
ante
prepar
ation
students
increasingly
diverse
workforce
society
necessary
work
also
good
citizenship
ante
course
educational
benefit
students
graded
law
school
transcript
works
plays
well
others
tested
bar
examiners
describe
words
less
understanding
lesson
life
rather
law
essentially
lesson
taught
rather
learned
taught
usual
sense
people
three
feet
shorter
twenty
years
younger
adults
university
michigan
law
school
institutions
ranging
boy
scout
troops
kindergartens
properly
considered
educational
benefit
surely
one
either
uniquely
relevant
law
school
uniquely
teachable
formal
educational
setting
therefore
appropriate
university
michigan
law
school
use
racial
discrimination
purpose
putting
together
critical
mass
convey
generic
lessons
socialization
good
citizenship
surely
less
appropriate
indeed
particularly
appropriate
civil
service
system
state
michigan
also
exposed
critical
masses
certain
races
presumably
become
better
americans
better
michiganders
better
civil
servants
surely
private
employers
criticized
indeed
praised
also
teach
good
citizenship
adult
employees
patriotic
system
racial
discrimination
hiring
nonminority
individuals
deprived
legal
education
civil
service
job
job
reason
skin
color
surely
understand
unlike
clear
constitutional
holding
racial
preferences
state
educational
institutions
impermissible
even
clear
anticonstitutional
holding
racial
preferences
state
educational
institutions
ok
today
split
double
header
seems
perversely
designed
prolong
controversy
litigation
future
lawsuits
presumably
focus
whether
discriminatory
scheme
question
contains
enough
evaluation
applicant
individual
ante
sufficiently
avoids
separate
admissions
tracks
ante
fall
grutter
rather
gratz
focus
whether
university
gone
beyond
bounds
faith
zealously
pursued
critical
mass
make
unconstitutional
de
facto
quota
system
rather
merely
permissible
goal
ante
quoting
sheet
metal
workers
eeoc
concurring
part
dissenting
part
lawsuits
may
focus
whether
particular
setting
issue
educational
benefits
flow
racial
diversity
issue
contested
grutter
opinion
accords
degree
deference
university
academic
decisions
ante
deference
imply
abandonment
abdication
judicial
review
cockrell
still
suits
may
challenge
bona
fides
institution
expressed
commitment
educational
benefits
diversity
immunize
discriminatory
scheme
grutter
tempting
targets
one
suppose
universities
talk
talk
multiculturalism
racial
diversity
courts
walk
walk
tribalism
racial
segregation
campuses
student
organizations
separate
minority
housing
opportunities
separate
minority
student
centers
even
separate
graduation
ceremonies
still
suits
may
claim
institution
racial
preferences
gone
mystical
critical
mass
finally
litigation
expected
behalf
minority
groups
intentionally
short
changed
institution
composition
generic
minority
critical
mass
look
forward
cases
constitution
proscribes
government
discrimination
basis
race
education
exception
barbara
grutter
petitioner
lee
bollinger
et
al
writ
certiorari
appeals
sixth
circuit
june
justice
thomas
justice
scalia
joins
parts
concurring
part
dissenting
part
frederick
douglass
speaking
group
abolitionists
almost
years
ago
delivered
message
lost
today
majority
regard
colored
people
always
benevolent
perceive
manifested
towards
us
ask
negro
benevolence
pity
sympathy
simply
justice
american
people
always
anxious
know
shall
us
one
answer
beginning
nothing
us
us
already
played
mischief
us
nothing
us
apples
remain
tree
strength
core
early
ripe
disposed
fall
let
fall
negro
stand
legs
let
fall
also
ask
give
chance
stand
legs
let
alone
interference
positive
injury
black
man
wants
address
delivered
boston
massachusetts
january
reprinted
frederick
douglass
papers
blassingame
mckivigan
eds
emphasis
original
like
douglass
believe
blacks
achieve
every
avenue
american
life
without
meddling
university
administrators
wish
see
students
succeed
whatever
color
share
respect
sympathies
sponsor
type
discrimination
advanced
university
michigan
law
school
law
school
constitution
however
tolerate
institutional
devotion
status
quo
admissions
policies
devotion
ripens
racial
discrimination
constitution
countenance
unprecedented
deference
gives
law
school
approach
inconsistent
concept
strict
scrutiny
one
argue
university
set
lower
general
admission
standard
impose
heightened
requirements
black
applicants
similarly
university
may
maintain
high
admission
standard
grant
exemptions
favored
races
law
school
choosing
purposes
maintains
exclusionary
admissions
system
knows
produces
racially
disproportionate
results
racial
discrimination
permissible
solution
wounds
elitist
admissions
policy
majority
upholds
law
school
racial
discrimination
interpreting
people
constitution
responding
faddish
slogan
cognoscenti
nevertheless
concur
part
opinion
first
agree
insofar
decision
approves
one
racial
classification
confirms
use
race
admissions
remains
unlawful
second
agree
holding
racial
discrimination
higher
education
admissions
illegal
years
see
ante
stating
racial
discrimination
longer
narrowly
tailored
necessary
compelling
state
interest
years
respectfully
dissent
remainder
opinion
judgment
however
believe
law
school
current
use
race
violates
equal
protection
clause
constitution
means
thing
today
months
majority
agrees
law
school
racial
discrimination
subjected
strict
scrutiny
ante
applying
standard
case
briefly
revisit
treatment
racial
classifications
strict
scrutiny
standard
purports
apply
case
first
enunciated
korematsu
held
ressing
public
necessity
may
sometimes
justify
existence
racial
discrimination
racial
antagonism
never
standard
pressing
public
necessity
frequently
termed
compelling
governmental
interest
see
regents
univ
cal
bakke
opinion
powell
majority
validated
two
circumstances
pressing
public
necessity
compelling
state
interest
possibly
justify
racial
discrimination
state
actors
first
lesson
korematsu
national
security
constitutes
pressing
public
necessity
though
government
use
race
advance
objective
must
narrowly
tailored
second
recognized
compelling
state
interest
government
effort
remedy
past
discrimination
responsible
richmond
croson
contours
pressing
public
necessity
discerned
interests
rejected
bases
racial
discrimination
example
wygant
jackson
bd
found
unconstitutional
agreement
school
board
teachers
union
favored
certain
minority
races
school
board
defended
policy
grounds
minority
teachers
provided
role
models
minority
students
racially
diverse
faculty
improve
education
students
see
brief
respondents
pp
stevens
dissenting
integrated
faculty
able
provide
benefits
student
body
provided
nearly
faculty
nevertheless
found
use
race
violated
equal
protection
clause
deeming
asserted
state
interests
insufficiently
compelling
plurality
opinion
white
concurring
judgment
none
interests
asserted
school
board
justify
racially
discriminatory
layoff
policy
even
greater
governmental
interest
involves
sensitive
role
courts
child
custody
determinations
palmore
sidoti
held
even
best
interests
child
constitute
compelling
state
interest
allow
state
award
custody
father
mother
marriage
finding
interest
substantial
holding
custody
decision
based
race
mother
new
husband
finally
rejected
interest
remedying
general
societal
discrimination
justification
race
discrimination
see
wygant
supra
plurality
opinion
croson
plurality
opinion
scalia
concurring
judgment
societal
discrimination
without
amorphous
basis
imposing
racially
classified
remedy
uphold
remedies
ageless
reach
past
timeless
ability
affect
future
wygant
supra
plurality
opinion
see
gratz
bollinger
ante
ginsburg
dissenting
accepted
national
security
rejected
even
best
interests
child
justification
racial
discrimination
conclude
measures
state
must
take
provide
bulwark
anarchy
prevent
violence
constitute
pressing
public
necessity
cf
lee
washington
per
curiam
black
concurring
indicating
protecting
prisoners
violence
might
justify
narrowly
tailored
racial
discrimination
croson
supra
scalia
concurring
judgment
least
state
local
action
issue
social
emergency
rising
level
imminent
danger
life
limb
justify
racial
discrimination
constitution
abhors
classifications
based
race
classifications
harm
favored
races
based
illegitimate
motives
also
every
time
government
places
citizens
racial
registers
makes
race
relevant
provision
burdens
benefits
demeans
us
purchased
price
immeasurable
human
suffering
equal
protection
principle
reflects
nation
understanding
classifications
ultimately
destructive
impact
individual
society
adarand
construction
peña
thomas
concurring
part
concurring
judgment
ii
unlike
majority
seek
define
precision
interest
asserted
law
school
determining
whether
interest
compelling
justify
racial
discrimination
law
school
maintains
wishes
obtain
educational
benefits
flow
student
body
diversity
brief
respondents
bollinger
et
al
statement
must
evaluated
carefully
implies
diversity
educational
benefits
components
law
school
compelling
state
interest
additionally
law
school
refusal
entertain
certain
changes
admissions
process
status
indicates
compelling
state
interest
seeks
validate
actually
broader
might
appear
first
glance
undoubtedly
ways
better
education
law
students
aside
ensuring
student
body
contains
critical
mass
underrepresented
minority
students
attaining
diversity
whatever
mechanism
law
school
obtains
educational
benefits
end
law
school
however
apparently
believes
racially
mixed
student
body
lead
educational
benefits
seeks
law
school
interest
allegedly
unique
educational
benefits
simply
forbidden
interest
racial
balancing
ante
majority
expressly
rejects
distinction
two
ideas
unique
educational
benefits
based
racial
aesthetics
race
sake
purely
sophistic
much
majority
uses
interchangeably
compare
ante
law
school
compelling
interest
attaining
diverse
student
body
ante
referring
compelling
interest
securing
educational
benefits
diverse
student
body
emphasis
added
law
school
argument
facile
understood
one
way
classroom
aesthetics
yields
educational
benefits
racially
discriminatory
admissions
policies
required
achieve
right
racial
mix
therefore
policies
required
achieve
educational
benefits
educational
benefits
end
allegedly
compelling
state
interest
diversity
see
ante
citing
need
openness
integrity
educational
institutions
provide
legal
ing
without
reference
consequential
educational
benefits
one
must
also
consider
law
school
refusal
entertain
changes
current
admissions
system
might
produce
educational
benefits
law
school
adamantly
disclaims
alternative
reduce
academic
selectivity
turn
require
law
school
become
different
institution
sacrifice
core
part
educational
mission
brief
respondents
bollinger
et
al
words
law
school
seeks
improve
marginally
education
offers
without
sacrificing
much
exclusivity
elite
proffered
interest
majority
vindicates
today
simply
diversity
instead
upholds
use
racial
discrimination
tool
advance
law
school
interest
offering
marginally
superior
education
maintaining
elite
institution
unless
constituent
part
state
interest
pressing
public
necessity
law
school
use
race
unconstitutional
find
fall
far
short
standard
iii
close
reading
opinion
reveals
legal
work
done
one
conclusory
statement
law
school
compelling
interest
securing
educational
benefits
diverse
student
body
ante
serious
effort
made
explain
benefits
fit
state
interests
recognized
rejected
compelling
see
part
supra
place
theoretical
constraints
enterprising
desire
discover
still
justifications
racial
discrimination
absence
explanation
one
might
expect
fall
back
judicial
policy
stare
decisis
eschews
even
weak
defense
holding
shunning
analysis
extent
justice
powell
opinion
regents
univ
cal
bakke
binding
ante
favor
unfounded
wholesale
adoption
justice
powell
opinion
bakke
decision
today
rest
fundamentally
flawed
proposition
racial
discrimination
contextualized
goal
classroom
aesthetics
compelling
one
context
another
know
see
approach
evaluating
state
interests
capable
judicial
application
today
insists
radically
expanding
range
permissible
uses
race
something
trivial
comparison
assembling
law
school
class
presume
majority
failure
justify
decision
reference
principle
arises
absence
principle
see
part
vi
infra
proper
standard
pressing
public
necessity
maintaining
public
law
school
follows
certainly
elite
law
school
likewise
marginal
improvements
legal
education
qualify
compelling
state
interest
legal
education
public
university
may
good
policy
otherwise
laudable
obviously
pressing
public
necessity
correct
legal
standard
applied
additionally
circumstantial
evidence
whether
state
activity
pressing
public
necessity
obtained
asking
whether
feel
compelled
engage
activity
evidence
general
engage
certain
activity
means
demonstrates
activity
constitutes
pressing
public
necessity
given
expansive
role
government
today
society
fact
fraction
reject
particular
enterprise
however
creates
presumption
enterprise
compelling
state
interest
sense
absence
public
american
bar
association
aba
accredited
law
school
alaska
delaware
massachusetts
new
hampshire
rhode
island
see
official
guide
law
schools
margolis
gordon
puskarz
rosenlieb
eds
hereinafter
guide
provides
evidence
michigan
maintenance
law
school
constitute
compelling
state
interest
foregoing
makes
clear
michigan
compelling
interest
law
school
much
less
elite
one
still
even
assuming
state
may
appropriate
circumstances
demonstrate
cognizable
interest
elite
law
school
michigan
failed
limited
scope
equal
protection
review
interests
activities
occur
within
state
jurisdiction
held
missouri
ex
rel
gaines
canada
missouri
satisfy
demands
separate
equal
paying
legal
training
blacks
neighboring
state
law
schools
maintaining
segregated
law
school
within
state
equal
protection
obligation
imposed
constitution
upon
severally
governmental
entities
responsible
laws
establishing
rights
duties
persons
within
borders
obligation
burden
cast
one
state
upon
another
state
excused
performance
another
state
may
fail
separate
responsibility
state
within
sphere
essence
statehood
maintained
dual
system
emphasis
added
equal
protection
clause
interpreted
gaines
permit
justify
racial
discrimination
basis
rest
nation
may
fail
interests
satisfy
equal
protection
clause
demands
found
within
state
jurisdiction
cognizable
state
interests
vindicated
operating
public
law
school
therefore
education
state
citizens
training
state
lawyers
james
campbell
address
opening
law
department
university
michigan
october
makes
clear
concerns
state
every
one
reasonable
facilities
preparing
honest
position
life
may
aspire
also
concerns
community
law
taught
understood
office
state
serious
legal
inquiries
may
frequently
arise
matters
public
private
rights
constantly
involved
discussed
ignorance
law
frequently
led
results
deplorable
alarming
history
state
one
instance
ignorance
led
unlawful
violence
shedding
innocent
blood
brown
legal
education
michigan
pp
emphasis
added
law
school
today
however
precious
little
training
attorneys
serve
citizens
michigan
graduates
university
michigan
law
school
made
less
applicants
michigan
bar
michigan
lawyers
weekly
available
http
internet
materials
visited
june
available
clerk
case
file
even
though
law
school
graduates
constitute
nearly
law
students
graduating
michigan
ibid
less
law
school
graduating
class
elects
stay
michigan
law
school
guide
thus
mere
law
school
entering
class
michigan
see
university
michigan
law
school
website
available
http
prospectivestudents
half
appears
stay
michigan
sum
law
school
trains
michigan
residents
overwhelmingly
serves
students
lawyers
leave
state
michigan
contrast
michigan
public
law
school
wayne
state
university
law
school
sends
graduates
serve
people
michigan
guide
take
social
scientist
conclude
precisely
law
school
status
elite
institution
causes
station
rest
country
lawyers
rather
training
ground
remain
michigan
law
school
decision
elite
institution
little
advance
welfare
people
michigan
cognizable
interest
state
michigan
fact
choose
maintain
elite
law
schools
raises
strong
inference
nothing
compelling
elite
status
arguably
public
law
schools
university
texas
university
california
berkeley
boalt
hall
university
virginia
maintain
reputation
excellence
law
two
texas
california
large
reasonably
expected
provide
elite
legal
training
separate
law
school
students
fact
stay
state
provide
legal
services
citizens
two
schools
far
outshine
law
school
producing
lawyers
university
texas
example
sends
graduates
work
state
texas
vindicating
state
interest
compelling
training
texas
lawyers
finally
even
law
school
racial
tinkering
produces
tangible
educational
benefits
marginal
improvement
legal
education
justify
racial
discrimination
law
school
compelling
interest
either
existence
current
educational
admissions
policies
iv
interest
remaining
elite
exclusive
majority
thinks
obviously
critical
requires
use
admissions
standards
turn
create
law
school
need
discriminate
basis
race
validates
admissions
standards
concluding
alternatives
require
dramatic
sacrifice
academic
quality
admitted
students
ante
need
considered
racial
discrimination
majority
view
methods
required
narrow
tailoring
prong
strict
scrutiny
inquiry
demands
context
alternative
work
well
ante
quoting
wygant
majority
errs
however
alternatives
must
workable
ante
well
vindicating
compelling
state
interest
never
explicitly
holds
law
school
desire
retain
status
quo
academic
selectivity
compelling
state
interest
demonstrated
see
part
supra
therefore
law
school
forced
choose
classroom
aesthetic
exclusionary
admissions
system
ways
adoption
different
admissions
methods
accepting
students
meet
minimum
qualifications
see
brief
amicus
curiae
law
school
achieve
vision
racially
aesthetic
student
body
without
use
racial
discrimination
law
school
concedes
holds
implicitly
guise
narrow
tailoring
law
school
compelling
state
interest
wants
agree
first
strict
scrutiny
law
school
assessment
benefits
racial
discrimination
devotion
admissions
status
quo
entitled
sort
deference
grounded
first
amendment
anywhere
else
second
even
academic
selectivity
must
maintained
costs
along
racial
discrimination
ignores
fact
top
law
schools
succeeded
meeting
aesthetic
demands
without
racial
discrimination
bases
unprecedented
deference
law
school
deference
antithetical
strict
scrutiny
idea
educational
autonomy
grounded
first
amendment
ante
view
basis
right
public
universities
otherwise
violate
equal
protection
clause
constitutionalization
academic
freedom
began
concurring
opinion
justice
frankfurter
sweezy
new
hampshire
sweezy
marxist
economist
investigated
attorney
general
new
hampshire
suspicion
subversive
prosecution
sought
inter
alia
contents
lecture
sweezy
given
university
new
hampshire
held
investigation
violated
due
process
justice
frankfurter
went
however
reasoning
first
amendment
created
right
academic
freedom
prohibited
investigation
opinion
concurring
result
much
rhetoric
justice
frankfurter
opinion
devoted
personal
right
sweezy
free
speech
see
citizen
made
forgo
even
part
basic
liberty
political
autonomy
subordinating
interest
state
must
compelling
still
claiming
reports
need
burdened
proof
justice
frankfurter
also
asserted
free
society
depends
free
universities
means
exclusion
governmental
intervention
intellectual
life
university
according
justice
frankfurter
business
university
provide
atmosphere
conducive
speculation
experiment
creation
atmosphere
prevail
four
essential
freedoms
university
determine
academic
grounds
may
teach
may
taught
shall
taught
may
admitted
study
citation
omitted
view
business
explain
cites
provisions
constitution
invent
new
doctrines
including
idea
first
amendment
authorizes
public
university
otherwise
violate
equal
protection
clause
majority
fails
summary
effort
prove
point
source
conclusion
public
universities
entitled
deference
even
within
confines
strict
scrutiny
justice
powell
opinion
bakke
justice
powell
part
relied
justice
frankfurter
opinion
sweezy
decision
keyishian
board
regents
univ
state
support
view
first
amendment
somehow
protected
public
university
use
race
admissions
bakke
keyishian
provides
answer
question
whether
fourteenth
amendment
restrictions
relaxed
applied
public
universities
case
held
state
statutes
regulations
designed
prevent
appointment
retention
persons
state
employment
violated
first
amendment
vagueness
statutes
covered
public
employees
invalidated
applied
university
faculty
members
although
appeared
sympathetic
notion
academic
freedom
calling
special
concern
first
amendment
however
relax
independent
constitutional
restrictions
public
universities
doubt
justice
frankfurter
spoke
governmental
intrusions
independence
universities
thinking
constitution
ban
racial
discrimination
majority
broad
deference
law
school
judgment
racial
aesthetics
leads
educational
benefits
stubborn
refusal
alter
status
quo
admissions
methods
finds
basis
constitution
decisions
deference
law
school
conclusion
racial
experimentation
leads
educational
benefits
adhered
serious
collateral
consequences
relies
heavily
social
science
evidence
justify
deference
see
ante
see
also
rothman
lipset
nevitte
racial
diversity
reconsidered
public
interest
finding
racial
mix
student
body
produced
racial
discrimination
type
practiced
law
school
fact
hinders
students
perception
academic
quality
never
acknowledges
however
growing
evidence
racial
sorts
heterogeneity
actually
impairs
learning
among
black
students
see
flowers
pascarella
cognitive
effects
college
racial
composition
african
american
students
years
college
college
student
development
concluding
black
students
experience
superior
cognitive
development
historically
black
colleges
hbcs
even
among
blacks
substantial
diversity
moderates
cognitive
effects
attending
hbc
allen
color
success
college
student
outcomes
predominantly
white
historically
black
public
colleges
universities
harv
educ
rev
finding
black
students
attending
hbcs
report
higher
academic
achievement
attending
predominantly
white
colleges
oral
argument
gratz
bollinger
ante
counsel
respondents
stated
every
single
one
hbcs
diverse
student
bodies
tr
oral
arg
precisely
counsel
meant
diverse
indeterminate
reported
morehouse
college
one
distinguished
hbc
nation
student
body
white
hispanic
college
admissions
data
handbook
ed
hereinafter
college
admissions
data
handbook
mississippi
valley
state
university
public
hbc
freshman
class
white
critical
mass
whites
institutions
critical
mass
indeed
small
proportion
majority
grants
deference
law
school
assessment
diversity
fact
yield
educational
benefits
ante
follows
therefore
hbc
assessment
racial
homogeneity
yield
educational
benefits
similarly
given
hbc
rejection
white
applicants
order
maintain
racial
homogeneity
seems
permissible
therefore
majority
view
equal
protection
clause
see
fordice
thomas
concurring
obviously
state
maintain
traditions
closing
particular
institutions
historically
white
historically
black
particular
racial
groups
contained
within
today
majority
opinion
seed
new
constitutional
justification
concept
thought
long
rightly
rejected
racial
segregation
moreover
one
think
light
decision
virginia
given
license
use
racial
discrimination
law
school
required
radically
reshape
admissions
process
even
point
sacrificing
elements
character
virginia
majority
without
word
academic
freedom
accepted
virginia
military
institute
vmi
representation
changes
adversative
method
education
required
admission
women
defer
vmi
judgment
changes
great
instead
concluded
manageable
case
involved
sex
discrimination
subjected
intermediate
strict
scrutiny
craig
boren
virginia
standard
review
dictated
greater
flexibility
granted
vmi
educational
policies
law
school
deserves
gave
deference
apparently
status
quo
defended
elite
establishment
law
school
rather
less
fashionable
southern
military
institution
defer
without
serious
inquiry
without
regard
applicable
legal
standard
virginia
also
notable
fact
relied
experience
formerly
institutions
service
academies
conclude
admission
women
vmi
manageable
today
however
majority
ignores
experience
institutions
forced
abandon
explicit
racial
discrimination
admissions
sky
fallen
boalt
hall
university
california
berkeley
example
prior
proposition
adoption
cal
art
bars
state
grant
ing
preferential
treatment
basis
race
operation
public
education
boalt
hall
enrolled
blacks
hispanics
class
without
deploying
express
racial
discrimination
admissions
boalt
entering
class
enrolled
blacks
university
california
law
medical
school
enrollments
available
http
total
underrepresented
minority
student
enrollment
boalt
hall
exceeds
levels
apparently
law
school
counted
resourceful
willfully
blind
real
experience
california
elsewhere
raises
inference
institutions
reputation
excellence
ante
rivaling
law
school
satisfied
sense
mission
without
resorting
prohibited
racial
discrimination
putting
aside
absence
legal
support
majority
reflexive
deference
much
said
view
use
tests
measures
predict
academic
performance
poor
substitute
system
gives
every
applicant
chance
prove
succeed
study
law
rallying
cry
absence
racial
discrimination
admissions
true
meritocracy
ignores
fact
entire
process
poisoned
numerous
exceptions
merit
example
national
debate
racial
discrimination
higher
education
admissions
much
made
fact
elite
institutions
utilize
legacy
preference
give
children
alumni
advantage
admissions
exceptions
true
meritocracy
give
lie
protestations
merit
admissions
fact
order
day
nation
universities
equal
protection
clause
however
prohibit
use
unseemly
legacy
preferences
many
kinds
arbitrary
admissions
procedures
equal
protection
clause
prohibit
classifications
made
basis
race
legacy
preferences
stand
constitution
racial
discrimination
twist
constitution
invalidate
legacy
preferences
otherwise
impose
vision
higher
education
admissions
nation
majority
similarly
stay
impulse
validate
faddish
racial
discrimination
constitution
clearly
forbids
event
nothing
ancient
honorable
constitutionally
protected
selective
admissions
university
michigan
well
aware
alternative
methods
historically
used
admission
students
brought
country
german
certificate
system
century
see
wechsler
qualified
student
hereinafter
qualified
student
system
secondary
school
certified
university
graduate
completed
course
offered
school
offered
admission
university
certification
regime
supplemented
later
virtually
replaced
least
midwest
prior
regime
rigorous
entrance
examinations
facially
percent
plans
used
texas
california
florida
see
ante
many
ways
descendents
certificate
system
certification
replaced
selective
admissions
beginning
century
universities
sought
exercise
control
composition
student
bodies
since
inception
selective
admissions
vehicle
racial
ethnic
religious
tinkering
experimentation
university
administrators
initial
driving
force
relocation
selective
function
high
school
universities
desire
select
racial
winners
losers
law
school
exhibits
today
columbia
harvard
others
infamously
determined
many
jews
today
law
school
argues
many
whites
discriminate
admissions
process
see
qualified
student
columbia
broun
britt
christians
study
prejudice
harvard
columbia
employed
intelligence
tests
precisely
jewish
applicants
predominantly
immigrants
scored
worse
tests
thus
columbia
claim
falsely
eliminated
boys
jews
propose
honestly
attempted
eliminate
lowest
grade
applicant
use
intelligence
testing
turns
good
many
low
grade
men
new
york
city
jews
letter
herbert
hawkes
dean
columbia
college
wilson
june
reprinted
qualified
student
words
tests
adopted
full
knowledge
disparate
impact
cf
defunis
odegaard
per
curiam
douglas
dissenting
similarly
modern
law
school
claim
ignorance
poor
performance
blacks
relatively
speaking
law
school
admissions
test
lsat
nevertheless
law
schools
continue
use
test
attempt
correct
black
underperformance
using
racial
discrimination
admissions
obtain
aesthetic
student
body
law
school
continued
adherence
measures
knows
produce
racially
skewed
results
entitled
deference
see
part
iv
supra
law
school
admits
test
imperfect
must
given
regularly
admits
students
score
national
median
test
see
app
showing
law
school
admitted
students
black
underrepresented
minorities
lsat
scores
lower
law
school
amici
seem
agree
fundamental
question
whether
test
useful
compare
brief
law
school
admission
council
amicus
curiae
lsat
scores
effective
predictor
students
performance
law
school
brief
harvard
black
law
students
association
et
al
amici
curiae
whether
lsat
measure
objective
merit
certainly
questionable
decided
use
lsat
law
school
must
accept
constitutional
burdens
come
decision
law
school
may
freely
continue
employ
lsat
allegedly
standards
whatever
fashion
likes
equal
protection
clause
forbids
today
allows
use
standards
racial
discrimination
infinite
variety
admissions
methods
available
law
school
considering
radical
thinking
historically
occurred
country
universities
law
school
intractable
approach
toward
admissions
striking
even
deign
make
law
school
try
methods
however
preferring
instead
grant
license
violate
constitution
courage
order
desegregation
public
schools
south
fears
basis
platitudes
rather
principle
force
law
school
abandon
decidedly
imperfect
admissions
regime
provides
basis
racial
discrimination
vi
absence
articulated
legal
principle
supporting
majority
principal
holding
suggests
another
rationale
believe
lies
beneath
decision
today
benighted
notions
one
tell
racial
discrimination
benefits
rather
hurts
minority
groups
see
adarand
scalia
concurring
part
concurring
judgment
racial
discrimination
necessary
remedy
general
societal
ills
precedents
supposedly
settled
issues
clearly
majority
still
commit
principle
racial
classifications
per
se
harmful
almost
amount
benefit
eye
beholder
justify
classifications
putting
aside
take
implicit
rejection
adarand
holding
beneficial
burdensome
racial
classifications
equally
invalid
must
contest
notion
law
school
discrimination
benefits
admitted
result
spends
considerable
time
discussing
impressive
display
amicus
support
law
school
case
corners
society
ante
nowhere
filings
evidence
purported
beneficiaries
racial
discrimination
prove
performing
even
near
level
students
receive
preferences
cf
thernstrom
thernstrom
reflections
shape
river
ucla
rev
discussing
failure
defenders
racial
discrimination
admissions
consider
fact
beneficiaries
underperforming
classroom
silence
case
deafening
us
view
higher
education
purpose
imparting
knowledge
skills
students
rather
communal
credentialing
process
law
school
looking
students
despite
lower
lsat
score
undergraduate
grade
point
average
succeed
study
law
law
school
seeks
facade
sufficient
class
looks
right
even
perform
right
law
school
tantalizes
unprepared
students
promise
university
michigan
degree
opportunities
offers
overmatched
students
take
bait
find
succeed
cauldron
competition
mismatch
crisis
restricted
elite
institutions
see
sowell
race
culture
even
minority
students
able
meet
normal
standards
range
colleges
universities
systematic
mismatching
minority
students
begun
top
mean
students
generally
overmatched
throughout
levels
higher
education
indeed
cover
tracks
aestheticists
cruel
farce
racial
discrimination
must
continue
selection
michigan
law
review
see
university
michigan
law
school
student
handbook
pp
noting
presence
diversity
plan
admission
review
hiring
law
firms
judicial
clerkships
beneficiaries
longer
tolerated
students
may
graduate
law
degrees
evidence
received
qualitatively
better
legal
education
become
better
lawyers
gone
less
elite
law
school
better
prepared
aestheticists
never
address
real
problems
facing
underrepresented
minorities
instead
continuing
social
experiments
people
children
beyond
harm
law
school
racial
discrimination
visits
upon
test
subjects
social
science
disproved
notion
discrimination
engender
attitudes
superiority
alternatively
provoke
resentment
among
believe
wronged
government
use
race
adarand
thomas
concurring
part
concurring
judgment
programs
stamp
minorities
badge
inferiority
may
cause
develop
dependencies
adopt
attitude
preferences
ibid
uncontested
year
law
school
admits
handful
blacks
admitted
absence
racial
discrimination
see
brief
respondents
bollinger
et
al
differentiate
belong
majority
blacks
admitted
law
school
discrimination
policy
tarred
undeserving
problem
stigma
depend
determinacy
whether
stigmatized
actually
beneficiaries
racial
discrimination
blacks
take
positions
highest
places
government
industry
academia
open
question
today
whether
skin
color
played
part
advancement
question
stigma
either
racial
discrimination
play
role
case
person
may
deemed
otherwise
unqualified
case
asking
question
unfairly
marks
blacks
succeed
without
discrimination
means
visibly
open
ante
finally
disturbing
reference
importance
country
law
schools
training
grounds
meant
cultivate
set
leaders
legitimacy
eyes
citizenry
use
racial
discrimination
deserves
discussion
noted
earlier
soundly
rejected
remedying
societal
discrimination
justification
governmental
use
race
wygant
plurality
opinion
croson
plurality
opinion
scalia
concurring
judgment
believe
every
racial
disproportionality
society
caused
kind
racial
discrimination
distinction
remedying
societal
discrimination
erasing
racial
disproportionalities
country
leadership
caste
lack
proportional
racial
sentation
among
leaders
caused
societal
discrimination
fixing
even
less
pressing
public
necessity
civics
lesson
presents
yet
another
example
judicial
selection
theory
political
representation
based
skin
color
endeavor
previously
rejected
see
holder
hall
thomas
concurring
judgment
majority
appears
believe
broader
utopian
goals
justify
law
school
use
race
equal
protection
clause
commands
elimination
racial
barriers
creation
order
satisfy
theory
society
organized
defunis
douglas
dissenting
vii
foregoing
makes
clear
believe
opinion
respects
erroneous
however
find
two
points
agree
first
note
issue
unconstitutional
racial
discrimination
among
groups
law
school
prefers
presented
case
petitioner
never
argued
law
school
engages
practice
law
school
maintains
see
brief
respondents
bollinger
et
al
join
opinion
insofar
confirms
type
racial
discrimination
remains
unlawful
ante
today
decision
still
case
racial
discrimination
help
university
enroll
unspecified
number
critical
mass
underrepresented
minority
students
unconstitutional
thus
law
school
may
discriminate
admissions
similarly
situated
blacks
hispanics
whites
asians
preferring
black
hispanic
applicants
instance
nothing
interest
recognized
majority
indeed
majority
describes
racial
balancing
patently
unconstitutional
ante
like
ante
express
opinion
whether
law
school
current
admissions
program
runs
afoul
prohibition
also
holds
racial
discrimination
admissions
given
another
years
deemed
longer
narrowly
tailored
law
school
fabricated
compelling
state
interest
ante
agree
years
practices
law
school
illegal
reasons
given
illegal
majority
rest
time
limitation
evidence
gap
credentials
black
white
students
shrinking
gone
recent
years
virtually
change
example
proportion
law
school
applicants
lsat
scores
higher
blacks
constituted
law
school
applicants
score
range
though
represented
applicants
law
school
admission
council
national
statistical
report
hereinafter
lsac
statistical
report
comparable
numbers
lsac
statistical
report
one
seriously
contend
racial
gap
academic
credentials
disappear
years
holding
racial
discrimination
unconstitutional
years
made
contingent
gap
closing
indeed
existence
racial
discrimination
type
practiced
law
school
may
impede
narrowing
lsat
testing
gap
applicant
lsat
score
improve
dramatically
preparation
preparation
cost
must
sufficient
benefits
attached
improved
score
justify
additional
study
whites
scoring
lsat
routinely
rejected
law
school
thus
whites
aspiring
admission
law
school
every
incentive
improve
score
levels
range
see
app
showing
white
applicants
rejected
scoring
range
blacks
hand
nearly
guaranteed
admission
score
showing
black
applicants
accepted
lsat
scores
admission
prospects
approach
certainty
incentive
black
applicant
continue
prepare
lsat
reasonably
assured
achieving
requisite
score
far
certain
lsat
behavior
responsive
law
school
admissions
nevertheless
possibility
remains
racial
discrimination
help
fulfill
bigot
prophecy
black
underperformance
confirms
conspiracy
theorist
belief
institutional
racism
fault
every
racial
disparity
society
therefore
understand
imposition
time
limit
holding
deference
pays
law
school
educational
judgments
refusal
change
admissions
policies
expire
point
policies
clearly
failed
perceived
need
racial
discrimination
academic
credentials
gap
still
ante
quoting
nathanson
bartnika
constitutionality
preferential
treatment
minority
applicants
professional
schools
chicago
bar
rec
defines
time
limit
terms
narrow
tailoring
see
ante
believe
arises
refusal
define
rigorously
broad
state
interest
vindicated
today
cf
part
ii
supra
observations
join
last
sentence
part
iii
opinion
immediate
future
however
majority
placed
imprimatur
practice
weaken
principle
equality
embodied
declaration
independence
equal
protection
clause
constitution
neither
knows
tolerates
classes
among
citizens
plessy
ferguson
harlan
dissenting
nearly
years
since
frederick
douglass
asked
intellectual
ancestors
law
school
nothing
us
nation
adopted
fourteenth
amendment
must
wait
another
years
see
principle
equality
vindicated
therefore
respectfully
dissent
remainder
opinion
judgment
footnotes
explains
admissions
policy
challenged
survives
review
standards
stated
adarand
constructors
inc
peña
richmond
croson
justice
powell
opinion
regents
univ
cal
bakke
case
therefore
require
revisit
whether
governmental
classifications
race
whether
designed
benefit
burden
historically
disadvantaged
group
subject
standard
judicial
review
cf
gratz
ante
ginsburg
dissenting
adarand
ginsburg
dissenting
case
necessitate
reconsideration
whether
interests
student
body
diversity
ante
rank
sufficiently
important
justify
government
program
cf
gratz
ante
ginsburg
dissenting
adarand
ginsburg
dissenting
footnotes
indeed
time
period
enrollment
native
american
students
dropped
low
three
students
assertion
small
group
constituted
critical
mass
native
americans
simply
absurd
footnotes
part
vii
justice
thomas
opinion
describes
portions
opinion
concur
see
post
footnotes
throughout
use
two
phrases
interchangeably
refusal
address
wygant
rejection
state
interest
virtually
indistinguishable
presented
law
school
perplexing
defers
law
school
judgment
racially
mixed
student
body
confers
educational
benefits
wygant
defer
school
board
judgment
respect
benefits
racially
mixed
faculty
confers
iversity
devotees
fashionable
catchphrase
useful
term
especially
something
serious
racial
discrimination
issue
equal
protection
clause
renders
color
one
skin
constitutionally
irrelevant
law
school
mission
refer
law
school
interest
aesthetic
law
school
wants
certain
appearance
shape
desks
tables
classrooms
color
students
sitting
also
use
term
aesthetic
believe
underlines
ineffectiveness
racially
discriminatory
admissions
actually
helping
truly
underprivileged
cf
orr
orr
noting
suspect
classifications
especially
impermissible
choice
made
state
appears
redound
benefit
without
need
special
solicitude
must
remembered
law
school
racial
discrimination
nothing
poor
uneducated
participate
elite
higher
education
therefore
presents
illusory
solution
challenges
facing
nation
law
school
believes
educational
benefits
racially
engineered
student
body
large
adjusting
overall
admissions
standards
achieve
racial
mix
require
sacrifice
elite
status
law
school
correct
educational
benefits
diversity
great
achieving
altering
admissions
standards
compromise
elite
status
law
school
reluctance
suggests
educational
benefits
alleges
significant
exist
cf
news
world
report
america
best
graduate
schools
ed
placing
schools
uppermost
nation
refers
component
law
school
compelling
state
interest
variously
academic
quality
avoiding
sacrifice
vital
component
educational
mission
academic
selectivity
ante
example
north
carolina
state
university
currently
white
college
admissions
data
handbook
seek
reduce
representation
whites
order
gain
additional
educational
benefits
cal
art
full
state
shall
discriminate
grant
preferential
treatment
individual
group
basis
race
sex
color
ethnicity
national
origin
operation
public
employment
public
education
public
contracting
see
coalition
economic
equity
wilson
given
incredible
deference
law
school
receives
think
appropriate
indulge
presumption
boalt
hall
operates
without
violating
california
law
courage
forbid
use
racial
discrimination
admissions
legacy
preferences
similar
practices
might
quickly
become
less
popular
possibility
lost
certain
elites
individual
institutional
supporting
law
school
case
example
recognition
law
school
case
even
racial
discrimination
place
black
men
underrepresented
law
school
see
guide
reporting
law
school
black
women
black
men
law
school
also
discriminate
favor
black
men
black
women
given
underrepresentation
answer
law
school
cares
image
among
elites
solving
real
problems
like
crisis
black
male
underperformance
interest
depends
enrolling
critical
mass
underrepresented
minority
students
majority
repeatedly
ante
cf
ante
referring
unique
experience
racial
minority
opposed
black
native
american
ante
rejecting
argument
law
school
maintains
disguised
quota
referring
total
number
enrolled
underrepresented
minority
students
specific
races
relates
law
school
racial
discrimination
clearly
approves
one
use
race
distinction
underrepresented
minority
applicants
races
relative
preference
awarded
black
applicant
example
similarly
situated
native
american
applicant
lead
enrollment
even
one
underrepresented
minority
student
balances
races
within
critical
mass
agree
justice
ginsburg
holding
racial
discrimination
admissions
illegal
years
based
upon
forecast
post
concurring
opinion
agree
justice
ginsburg
characterization
holding
expression
hope
ibid
use
score
benchmark
law
school
feels
relevant
score
range
applicant
consideration
absent
race
discrimination
see
brief
respondents
bollinger
et
al
app
pet
cert
showing
median
lsat
score
accepted
applicants
showing
median
lsat
score
accepted
applicants
years
university
michigan
law
school
website
available
http
showing
median
lsat
score
accepted
applicants
majority
non
sequitur
observation
since
number
blacks
scored
upper
ranges
lsat
grown
ante
says
nothing
current
trends
first
black
participation
lsat
early
lagged
behind
black
representation
general
population
instance
law
school
applicants
black
whereas
law
school
applicants
black
see
lsac
statistical
reports
today
however
unless
blacks
begin
applying
law
school
proportions
greater
representation
general
population
growth
absolute
numbers
high
scoring
blacks
expected
plateau
black
applicants
law
school
lsat
scores
number
see
lsac
statistical
reports
use
lsat
example
incentive
structure
place
admissions
criteria
including
undergraduate
grades
minorities
consistently
admitted
thresholds
significantly
lower
whites