gratz
et
al
bollinger
et
argued
april
decided
june
petitioners
gratz
hamacher
michigan
residents
caucasian
applied
admission
university
michigan
university
college
literature
science
arts
lsa
respectively
although
lsa
considered
gratz
well
qualified
hamacher
within
qualified
range
denied
early
admission
ultimately
denied
admission
order
promote
consistency
review
many
applications
received
university
office
undergraduate
admissions
oua
uses
written
guidelines
academic
year
guidelines
changed
number
times
period
relevant
litigation
oua
considers
number
factors
making
admissions
decisions
including
high
school
grades
standardized
test
scores
high
school
quality
curriculum
strength
geography
alumni
relationships
leadership
race
relevant
periods
university
considered
hispanics
native
americans
underrepresented
minorities
undisputed
university
admits
virtually
every
qualified
applicant
groups
current
guidelines
use
selection
method
every
applicant
underrepresented
racial
ethnic
minority
group
automatically
awarded
points
needed
guarantee
admission
petitioners
filed
class
action
alleging
university
use
racial
preferences
undergraduate
admissions
violated
equal
protection
clause
fourteenth
amendment
title
vi
civil
rights
act
sought
compensatory
punitive
damages
past
violations
declaratory
relief
finding
respondents
violated
rights
nondiscriminatory
treatment
injunction
prohibiting
respondents
continuing
discriminate
basis
race
order
requiring
lsa
offer
hamacher
admission
transfer
student
district
granted
petitioners
motion
certify
class
consisting
individuals
applied
denied
admission
lsa
academic
year
forward
members
racial
ethnic
groups
respondents
treated
less
favorably
basis
race
hamacher
whose
claim
found
challenge
racial
discrimination
classwide
basis
designated
class
representative
summary
judgment
respondents
relied
justice
powell
principal
opinion
regents
univ
cal
bakke
expressed
view
consideration
race
factor
admissions
might
cases
serve
compelling
government
interest
respondents
contended
lsa
interest
educational
benefits
result
racially
ethnically
diverse
student
body
program
narrowly
tailored
serve
interest
agreed
respondents
lsa
current
admissions
guidelines
granted
summary
judgment
respect
however
also
found
lsa
admissions
guidelines
operated
functional
equivalent
quota
running
afoul
justice
powell
bakke
opinion
thus
granted
petitioners
summary
judgment
respect
respondents
admissions
programs
years
interlocutory
appeals
pending
sixth
circuit
issued
opinion
grutter
bollinger
post
upholding
admissions
program
used
university
law
school
granted
certiorari
cases
even
though
sixth
circuit
yet
rendered
judgment
one
held
petitioners
standing
seek
declaratory
injunctive
relief
rejects
justice
stevens
contention
hamacher
actually
apply
admission
transfer
student
future
injury
claim
best
conjectural
hypothetical
rather
real
immediate
injury
fact
necessary
establish
standing
type
case
denial
equal
treatment
resulting
imposition
barrier
ultimate
inability
obtain
benefit
northeastern
chapter
associated
gen
contractors
america
jacksonville
face
barrier
establish
standing
party
need
demonstrate
able
ready
perform
discriminatory
policy
prevents
equal
basis
ibid
bringing
equal
protection
challenge
university
use
race
undergraduate
admissions
hamacher
alleged
university
denied
opportunity
compete
admission
equal
basis
hamacher
denied
admission
university
freshman
applicant
even
though
underrepresented
minority
applicant
qualifications
admitted
denied
admission
hamacher
demonstrated
able
ready
apply
transfer
student
university
cease
use
race
undergraduate
admissions
therefore
standing
seek
prospective
relief
respect
university
continued
use
race
also
rejected
justice
stevens
contention
use
undergraduate
transfer
admissions
differs
university
use
race
undergraduate
freshman
admissions
hamacher
lacks
standing
represent
absent
class
members
challenging
latter
year
oua
produces
document
setting
forth
guidelines
seeking
admission
lsa
including
freshman
transfer
applicants
transfer
applicant
guidelines
specifically
factors
qualifications
considered
assessing
freshman
applicants
fact
criteria
used
determine
whether
transfer
applicant
contribute
diversity
identical
used
evaluate
freshman
applicants
difference
underrepresented
minority
freshman
applicants
receive
points
virtually
minimally
qualified
admitted
generally
minimally
qualified
minority
transfer
applicants
admitted
outright
difference
might
relevant
narrow
tailoring
analysis
clearly
effect
petitioners
standing
challenge
university
use
race
undergraduate
admissions
assertion
diversity
compelling
state
interest
justifying
consideration
race
undergraduate
applicants
see
general
telephone
southwest
falcon
blum
yaretsky
distinguished
district
carefully
considered
decision
certify
class
action
correct
cf
coopers
lybrand
livesay
hamacher
personal
stake
view
past
injury
potential
injury
faced
time
certification
demonstrates
may
maintain
action
pp
university
use
race
current
freshman
admissions
policy
narrowly
tailored
achieve
respondents
asserted
interest
diversity
policy
violates
equal
protection
clause
reasons
set
forth
grutter
bollinger
post
today
rejected
petitioners
argument
diversity
constitute
compelling
state
interest
however
finds
university
current
policy
automatically
distributes
points
points
needed
guarantee
admission
every
single
underrepresented
minority
applicant
solely
race
narrowly
tailored
achieve
educational
diversity
bakke
justice
powell
explained
view
permissible
university
employ
admissions
program
race
ethnic
background
may
deemed
particular
applicant
file
nothing
justice
powell
bakke
opinion
signaled
university
may
employ
whatever
means
desires
achieve
diversity
without
regard
limits
imposed
strict
scrutiny
pp
university
use
race
current
freshman
admissions
policy
violates
equal
protection
clause
also
violates
title
vi
see
alexander
sandoval
general
building
contractors
assn
pennsylvania
accordingly
reverses
portion
district
decision
granting
respondents
summary
judgment
respect
liability
pp
reversed
part
remanded
rehnquist
delivered
opinion
scalia
kennedy
thomas
joined
filed
concurring
opinion
breyer
joined
part
thomas
filed
concurring
opinion
breyer
filed
opinion
concurring
judgment
stevens
filed
dissenting
opinion
souter
joined
souter
filed
dissenting
opinion
ginsburg
joined
part
ii
ginsburg
filed
dissenting
opinion
souter
joined
breyer
joined
part
jennifer
gratz
patrick
hamacher
petitioners
lee
bollinger
et
al
writ
certiorari
appeals
sixth
circuit
june
chief
justice
rehnquist
delivered
opinion
granted
certiorari
case
decide
whether
university
michigan
use
racial
preferences
undergraduate
admissions
violate
equal
protection
clause
fourteenth
amendment
title
vi
civil
rights
act
brief
petitioners
find
manner
university
considers
race
applicants
undergraduate
admissions
guidelines
violates
constitutional
statutory
provisions
reverse
portion
district
decision
upholding
guidelines
petitioners
jennifer
gratz
patrick
hamacher
applied
admission
university
michigan
university
college
literature
science
arts
lsa
residents
state
michigan
petitioners
caucasian
gratz
applied
admission
fall
notified
january
year
final
decision
regarding
admission
delayed
april
delay
based
upon
university
determination
although
gratz
qualified
competitive
students
ha
admitted
first
review
app
pet
cert
gratz
notified
april
lsa
unable
offer
admission
enrolled
university
michigan
dearborn
graduated
spring
hamacher
applied
admission
lsa
fall
final
decision
application
also
postponed
though
credentials
qualified
range
level
needed
first
review
admission
ibid
hamacher
application
subsequently
denied
april
enrolled
michigan
state
october
gratz
hamacher
filed
lawsuit
district
eastern
district
michigan
university
michigan
james
duderstadt
lee
petitioners
complaint
suit
alleging
violations
threatened
violations
rights
plaintiffs
class
represent
equal
protection
laws
fourteenth
amendment
racial
discrimination
violation
et
seq
app
petitioners
sought
inter
alia
compensatory
punitive
damages
past
violations
declaratory
relief
finding
respondents
violated
petitioners
rights
nondiscriminatory
treatment
injunction
prohibiting
respondents
continuing
discriminate
basis
race
violation
fourteenth
amendment
order
requiring
lsa
offer
hamacher
admission
transfer
district
granted
petitioners
motion
class
certification
determining
class
action
appropriate
pursuant
federal
rule
civil
procedure
certified
class
consisted
individuals
applied
granted
admission
college
literature
science
arts
university
michigan
academic
years
forward
members
racial
ethnic
groups
including
caucasian
defendants
treated
less
favorably
basis
race
considering
application
admission
app
hamacher
whose
claim
district
found
challenge
racial
discrimination
pervasively
applied
classwide
basis
designated
class
representative
also
granted
petitioners
motion
bifurcate
proceedings
liability
damages
phase
liability
phase
determine
whether
respondents
use
race
factor
admissions
decisions
violates
equal
protection
clause
fourteenth
amendment
constitution
university
changed
admissions
guidelines
number
times
period
relevant
litigation
summarize
significant
changes
briefly
university
office
undergraduate
admissions
oua
oversees
lsa
admissions
order
promote
consistency
review
large
number
applications
received
oua
uses
written
guidelines
academic
year
admissions
counselors
make
admissions
decisions
accordance
guidelines
oua
considers
number
factors
making
admissions
decisions
including
high
school
grades
standardized
test
scores
high
school
quality
curriculum
strength
geography
alumni
relationships
leadership
oua
also
considers
race
periods
relevant
litigation
university
considered
hispanics
native
americans
underrepresented
minorities
undisputed
university
admits
virtually
every
qualified
applicant
groups
app
pet
cert
oua
counselors
evaluated
applications
according
grade
point
average
combined
referred
scuga
factors
factors
included
quality
applicant
high
school
strength
applicant
high
school
curriculum
applicant
unusual
circumstances
applicant
geographical
residence
applicant
alumni
relationships
scores
combined
produce
applicant
gpa
score
reviewing
admissions
counselors
referenced
set
guidelines
tables
listed
gpa
ranges
vertical
axis
american
college
aptitude
test
scores
horizontal
axis
table
divided
cells
included
one
courses
action
taken
including
admit
reject
delay
additional
information
postpone
reconsideration
years
applicants
gpa
score
score
subject
different
admissions
outcomes
based
upon
racial
ethnic
example
caucasian
applicant
gratz
gpa
score
act
score
placed
within
cell
calling
postponed
decision
application
minority
applicant
gratz
scores
fallen
within
cell
calling
admission
university
modified
admissions
procedure
specifically
formula
calculating
applicant
gpa
score
restructured
include
additional
point
values
category
scuga
factors
new
system
applicants
receive
points
underrepresented
minority
status
socioeconomic
disadvantage
attendance
high
school
predominantly
underrepresented
minority
population
underrepresentation
unit
student
applying
example
men
sought
pursue
career
nursing
procedures
hamacher
gpa
score
act
score
placed
cell
applicant
table
calling
postponement
final
admissions
decision
underrepresented
minority
applicant
placed
cell
generally
admitted
beginning
academic
year
oua
dispensed
guidelines
tables
scuga
point
system
favor
selection
index
applicant
score
maximum
points
index
divided
linearly
ranges
generally
calling
admissions
dispositions
follows
admit
admit
postpone
postpone
admit
delay
postpone
delay
reject
application
received
points
based
high
school
grade
point
average
standardized
test
scores
academic
quality
applicant
high
school
strength
weakness
high
school
curriculum
residency
alumni
relationship
personal
essay
personal
achievement
leadership
particular
significance
miscellaneous
category
applicant
entitled
points
based
upon
membership
underrepresented
racial
ethnic
minority
group
university
explained
selection
index
admissions
changed
mechanics
substance
race
ethnicity
considered
admissions
app
pet
cert
application
years
guidelines
provided
qualified
applicants
underrepresented
minority
groups
admitted
soon
possible
light
university
belief
applicants
likely
enroll
promptly
notified
admission
also
university
carefully
managed
rolling
admissions
system
permit
consideration
certain
applications
submitted
later
academic
year
use
protected
seats
specific
groups
including
athletes
foreign
students
rotc
candidates
underrepresented
minorities
protected
categories
eligible
seats
committee
called
enrollment
working
group
ewg
projected
many
applicants
protected
categories
university
likely
receive
given
date
paced
admissions
decisions
permit
full
consideration
expected
applications
groups
space
filled
qualified
candidates
designated
groups
toward
end
admissions
season
used
admit
qualified
candidates
remaining
applicant
pool
including
waiting
list
oua
used
selection
index
every
applicant
underrepresented
racial
ethnic
minority
group
awarded
points
starting
however
university
established
admissions
review
committee
arc
provide
additional
level
consideration
applications
new
system
counselors
may
discretion
flag
application
arc
review
determining
applicant
academically
prepared
succeed
achieved
minimum
selection
index
score
possesses
quality
characteristic
important
university
composition
freshman
class
high
class
rank
unique
life
experiences
challenges
circumstances
interests
talents
socioeconomic
disadvantage
underrepresented
race
ethnicity
geography
reviewing
flagged
applications
arc
determines
whether
admit
defer
deny
applicant
parties
filed
summary
judgment
respect
liability
petitioners
asserted
lsa
use
race
factor
admissions
violates
title
vi
civil
rights
act
stat
equal
protection
clause
fourteenth
amendment
respondents
relied
justice
powell
opinion
regents
univ
cal
bakke
respond
petitioners
arguments
discussed
greater
detail
opinion
grutter
bollinger
post
justice
powell
bakke
expressed
view
consideration
race
factor
admissions
might
cases
serve
compelling
government
interest
see
respondents
contended
lsa
interest
educational
benefits
result
racially
ethnically
diverse
student
body
program
narrowly
tailored
serve
interest
asserted
lsa
compelling
interest
remedying
university
past
current
discrimination
district
began
analysis
reviewing
decision
bakke
see
supp
ed
although
acknowledged
decision
since
bakke
explicitly
accepted
diversity
rationale
discussed
justice
powell
see
supp
also
concluded
years
since
bakke
ruled
justification
use
race
supp
district
concluded
respondents
amici
curiae
presented
solid
evidence
racially
ethnically
diverse
student
body
produces
significant
educational
benefits
achieving
student
body
constitutes
compelling
governmental
interest
see
next
considered
whether
lsa
admissions
guidelines
narrowly
tailored
achieve
interest
see
relying
justice
powell
opinion
bakke
district
determined
admissions
program
lsa
began
using
narrowly
tailored
means
achieving
university
interest
educational
benefits
flow
racially
ethnically
diverse
student
body
see
supp
emphasized
lsa
current
program
utilize
rigid
quotas
seek
admit
predetermined
number
minority
students
see
ibid
award
points
membership
underrepresented
minority
group
district
view
functional
equivalent
quota
minority
candidates
insulated
review
virtue
points
see
likewise
rejected
assertion
lsa
program
operates
like
system
justice
powell
found
objectionable
bakke
grounds
lsa
applicants
competing
different
groups
seats
see
supp
also
dismissed
petitioners
assertion
lsa
current
system
nothing
means
achieve
racial
balancing
see
explained
lsa
seek
achieve
certain
proportion
minority
students
let
alone
proportion
represents
community
see
ibid
district
found
admissions
guidelines
lsa
used
problematic
view
university
prior
practice
protecting
reserving
seats
underrepresented
minority
applicants
effectively
kept
nonprotected
applicants
competing
slots
see
system
concluded
operated
functional
equivalent
quota
ran
afoul
justice
powell
opinion
see
supp
based
findings
granted
petitioners
motion
summary
judgment
respect
lsa
admissions
programs
existence
respondents
motion
respect
lsa
admissions
programs
see
accordingly
district
denied
petitioners
request
injunctive
relief
see
district
issued
order
consistent
rulings
certified
two
questions
interlocutory
appeal
sixth
circuit
pursuant
parties
appealed
aspects
district
rulings
appeals
heard
case
en
banc
day
grutter
bollinger
sixth
circuit
later
issued
opinion
grutter
upholding
admissions
program
used
university
michigan
law
school
petitioner
case
sought
writ
certiorari
petitioners
asked
grant
certiorari
case
well
despite
fact
appeals
yet
rendered
judgment
address
constitutionality
consideration
race
university
admissions
wider
range
circumstances
see
ii
throughout
course
litigation
petitioners
contend
university
consideration
race
undergraduate
admissions
decisions
violates
equal
protection
clause
fourteenth
title
consider
first
whether
petitioners
standing
seek
declaratory
injunctive
relief
finding
next
consider
merits
claims
although
party
raised
issue
justice
stevens
argues
petitioners
lack
article
iii
standing
seek
injunctive
relief
respect
university
use
race
undergraduate
admissions
first
contends
hamacher
actually
appl
admission
transfer
student
claim
future
injury
best
hypothetical
rather
immediate
post
dissenting
opinion
whether
hamacher
actually
applied
admission
transfer
student
determinative
ability
seek
injunctive
relief
case
hamacher
submitted
transfer
application
rejected
still
need
allege
intent
apply
order
seek
prospective
relief
justice
stevens
means
hamacher
apply
transfer
must
never
really
intended
conclusion
directly
conflicts
finding
fact
entered
district
hamacher
intends
transfer
university
michigan
defendants
cease
use
race
admission
preference
app
well
established
intent
may
relevant
standing
equal
protection
challenge
clements
fashing
example
considered
challenge
provision
texas
constitution
requiring
immediate
resignation
certain
state
officeholders
upon
announcement
candidacy
another
office
concluded
plaintiff
officeholders
article
iii
standing
alleged
announced
candidacy
offices
automatic
resignation
provision
challenging
accord
turner
fouche
plaintiff
property
standing
challenge
property
ownership
requirement
membership
school
board
even
though
evidence
plaintiff
applied
rejected
quinn
millsap
plaintiffs
property
standing
challenge
property
ownership
requirement
membership
government
board
even
though
lacked
standing
challenge
requirement
applied
likewise
northeastern
chapter
associated
gen
contractors
america
jacksonville
considered
whether
association
challenging
ordinance
gave
preferential
treatment
certain
businesses
award
city
contracts
needed
show
one
members
received
contract
absent
ordinance
order
establish
standing
finding
showing
necessary
explained
fact
equal
protection
case
variety
denial
equal
treatment
resulting
imposition
barrier
ultimate
inability
obtain
benefit
context
challenge
program
fact
inability
compete
equal
footing
bidding
process
loss
contract
concluded
face
barrier
establish
standing
party
challenging
program
like
jacksonville
need
demonstrate
able
ready
bid
contracts
discriminatory
policy
prevents
equal
basis
ibid
bringing
equal
protection
challenge
university
use
race
undergraduate
admissions
hamacher
alleged
university
denied
opportunity
compete
admission
equal
basis
hamacher
applied
university
freshman
applicant
denied
admission
even
though
underrepresented
minority
applicant
qualifications
admitted
see
app
pet
cert
denied
admission
hamacher
demonstrated
able
ready
apply
transfer
student
university
cease
use
race
undergraduate
admissions
therefore
standing
seek
prospective
relief
respect
university
continued
use
race
undergraduate
admissions
justice
stevens
raises
second
argument
standing
contends
university
use
race
undergraduate
transfer
admissions
differs
use
race
undergraduate
freshman
admissions
therefore
hamacher
lacks
standing
represent
absent
class
members
challenging
latter
post
dissenting
opinion
initial
matter
question
whether
relevance
variation
matter
article
iii
standing
whether
goes
propriety
class
certification
pursuant
federal
rule
civil
procedure
parties
briefed
question
standing
versus
adequacy
however
need
resolve
question
today
regardless
whether
requirement
deemed
one
adequacy
standing
clearly
satisfied
time
petitioners
filed
original
complaint
brief
merits
consistently
challenged
university
use
race
undergraduate
admissions
asserted
justification
promoting
diversity
see
app
brief
petitioners
consistent
challenge
petitioners
requested
injunctive
relief
prohibiting
respondent
continuing
discriminate
basis
race
app
sought
certify
class
consisting
individuals
members
underrepresented
minority
group
either
applied
admission
lsa
rejected
intended
apply
admission
lsa
academic
years
forward
district
determined
proposed
class
satisfied
requirements
federal
rules
civil
procedure
including
requirements
numerosity
commonality
typicality
see
fed
rule
civ
proc
app
concluded
hamacher
adequate
representative
class
pursuit
compensatory
injunctive
relief
purposes
rule
see
app
found
record
utterly
devoid
presence
antagonism
interests
hamacher
members
class
seek
represent
finally
district
concluded
petitioners
claim
appropriate
class
treatment
university
racial
discrimination
pervasively
applied
classwide
basis
certified
class
pursuant
federal
rule
civil
procedure
designated
hamacher
class
representative
app
justice
stevens
cites
blum
yaretsky
arguing
district
erred
post
blum
considered
class
action
suit
brought
medicaid
beneficiaries
named
representatives
blum
challenged
decisions
state
medicaid
utilization
review
committee
urc
transfer
lower
levels
care
without
view
sufficient
procedural
safeguards
class
certified
plaintiffs
obtained
order
expanding
class
certification
include
challenges
urc
decisions
transfer
patients
higher
levels
care
well
defendants
argued
named
representatives
represent
absent
class
members
challenging
transfers
higher
levels
care
threatened
transfers
agreed
noted
othing
record
suggests
individual
respondents
either
transferred
intensive
care
threatened
transfers
found
transfers
lower
levels
care
involved
number
fundamentally
different
concerns
transfers
higher
ones
noting
example
transfers
lower
levels
care
implicated
beneficiaries
property
interests
given
concomitant
decrease
medicaid
benefits
transfers
higher
levels
care
present
case
university
use
race
undergraduate
transfer
admissions
implicate
significantly
different
set
concerns
use
race
undergraduate
freshman
admissions
respondents
challenged
hamacher
standing
certification
stage
never
grounds
university
use
race
undergraduate
transfer
admissions
involves
different
set
concerns
use
race
freshman
admissions
respondents
failure
allege
difference
simply
consistent
fact
difference
exists
year
oua
produces
document
entitled
college
literature
science
arts
guidelines
terms
sets
forth
guidelines
individuals
seeking
admission
lsa
including
freshman
applicants
transfer
applicants
international
student
applicants
like
see
app
etc
pp
guidelines
used
evaluate
transfer
applicants
specifically
factors
qualifications
considered
assessing
freshman
applicants
fact
criteria
used
determine
whether
transfer
applicant
contribute
university
stated
goal
diversity
identical
used
evaluate
freshman
applicants
example
class
certified
district
found
hamacher
standing
represent
class
transfer
guidelines
contained
separate
section
entitled
contribution
diverse
student
body
section
explained
transfer
applicant
contribut
diverse
student
body
generally
admitted
even
substantially
lower
qualifications
required
transfer
applicants
ibid
emphasis
added
determine
whether
transfer
applicant
capable
contribut
ing
diverse
student
body
admissions
counselors
instructed
determine
whether
transfer
applicant
met
criteria
defined
section
iv
category
scuga
factors
used
assess
freshman
applicants
ibid
section
iv
category
entitled
contribution
diverse
class
explained
university
committed
rich
educational
experience
students
diverse
opposed
homogenous
student
population
enhances
educational
experience
students
insure
diverse
class
significant
weight
given
admissions
process
indicators
students
contribution
diverse
class
indicators
used
evaluating
freshman
transfer
applicants
alike
list
member
underrepresented
minority
group
establishing
applicant
contribution
diversity
see
indeed
difference
university
use
race
considering
freshman
transfer
applicants
underrepresented
minority
freshman
applicants
receive
points
virtually
minimally
qualified
admitted
generally
minimally
qualified
minority
transfer
applicants
admitted
outright
difference
might
relevant
narrow
tailoring
analysis
clearly
effect
petitioners
standing
challenge
university
use
race
undergraduate
admissions
assertion
diversity
compelling
state
interest
justifies
consideration
race
undergraduate
particularly
instructive
statement
general
telephone
southwest
falcon
used
biased
testing
procedure
evaluate
applicants
employment
incumbent
employees
class
action
behalf
every
applicant
employee
might
prejudiced
test
clearly
satisfy
requirements
rule
emphasis
added
district
found
sole
rationale
university
provided
preferences
undergraduate
admissions
interest
educational
benefits
result
diverse
student
body
app
pet
cert
petitioners
argue
interest
diversity
compelling
state
interest
ever
capable
justifying
use
race
undergraduate
admissions
see
brief
petitioners
sum
set
concerns
implicated
university
use
race
evaluating
undergraduate
admissions
applications
therefore
agree
district
carefully
considered
decision
certify
challenge
university
consideration
race
undergraduate
admissions
see
app
singular
policy
applied
classwide
cf
coopers
lybrand
livesay
class
determination
generally
involves
considerations
enmeshed
factual
legal
issues
comprising
plaintiff
cause
action
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
indeed
class
action
treatment
particularly
important
case
claims
individual
students
run
risk
becoming
moot
class
action
vehicle
provides
mechanism
ensuring
justiciable
claim
app
thus
think
clear
hamacher
personal
stake
view
past
injury
potential
injury
faced
time
certification
demonstrates
may
maintain
challenge
university
use
race
undergraduate
admissions
petitioners
argue
first
foremost
university
use
race
undergraduate
admissions
violates
fourteenth
amendment
specifically
contend
sanctioned
use
racial
classifications
remedy
identified
discrimination
justification
respondents
never
relied
brief
petitioners
petitioners
argue
diversity
basis
employing
racial
preferences
simply
indefinite
constitute
compelling
interest
capable
supporting
means
reasons
set
forth
today
grutter
bollinger
post
rejected
arguments
petitioners
petitioners
alternatively
argue
even
university
interest
diversity
constitute
compelling
state
interest
district
erroneously
concluded
university
use
race
current
freshman
admissions
policy
narrowly
tailored
achieve
interest
petitioners
argue
guidelines
university
began
using
remotely
resemble
kind
consideration
race
ethnicity
justice
powell
endorsed
bakke
brief
petitioners
respondents
reply
university
current
admissions
program
narrowly
tailored
avoids
problems
medical
school
university
california
davis
program
davis
rejected
justice
claim
program
hews
closely
admissions
program
described
justice
powell
well
harvard
college
admissions
program
endorsed
brief
respondents
specifically
respondents
contend
lsa
policy
provides
individualized
consideration
justice
powell
considered
hallmark
constitutionally
appropriate
admissions
program
reasons
set
agree
well
established
racial
classifications
reviewable
equal
protection
clause
must
strictly
scrutinized
adarand
constructors
peña
review
dependent
race
burdened
benefited
particular
classification
ibid
quoting
richmond
croson
plurality
opinion
thus
person
whatever
race
right
demand
governmental
actor
subject
constitution
justify
racial
classification
subjecting
person
unequal
treatment
strictest
judicial
scrutiny
adarand
withstand
strict
scrutiny
analysis
respondents
must
demonstrate
university
use
race
current
admission
program
employs
narrowly
tailored
measures
compelling
governmental
interests
acial
classifications
simply
pernicious
permit
exact
connection
justification
classification
fullilove
klutznick
stevens
dissenting
review
whether
requirements
met
must
entail
searching
examination
adarand
supra
quoting
wygant
jackson
bd
plurality
opinion
powell
find
university
policy
automatically
distributes
points
points
needed
guarantee
admission
every
single
underrepresented
minority
applicant
solely
race
narrowly
tailored
achieve
interest
educational
diversity
respondents
claim
justifies
program
bakke
justice
powell
reiterated
referring
members
one
group
reason
race
ethnic
origin
discrimination
sake
explained
however
view
permissible
university
employ
admissions
program
race
ethnic
background
may
deemed
particular
applicant
file
explained
program
might
allow
file
particular
black
applicant
examined
potential
contribution
diversity
without
factor
race
decisive
compared
example
applicant
identified
latter
thought
exhibit
qualities
likely
promote
beneficial
educational
pluralism
ibid
system
justice
powell
view
flexible
enough
consider
pertinent
elements
diversity
light
particular
qualifications
applicant
ibid
justice
powell
opinion
bakke
emphasized
importance
considering
particular
applicant
individual
assessing
qualities
individual
possesses
turn
evaluating
individual
ability
contribute
unique
setting
higher
education
admissions
program
justice
powell
described
however
contemplate
single
characteristic
automatically
ensured
specific
identifiable
contribution
university
diversity
see
see
also
metro
broadcasting
fcc
dissenting
concluding
fcc
policy
embodie
related
notions
particular
applicant
virtue
race
ethnicity
alone
valued
applicants
applicant
provide
distinct
perspective
impermissibly
value
individuals
based
presumption
persons
think
manner
associated
race
instead
approach
justice
powell
described
characteristic
particular
applicant
considered
assessing
applicant
entire
application
current
lsa
policy
provide
individualized
consideration
lsa
policy
automatically
distributes
points
every
single
applicant
underrepresented
minority
group
defined
university
consideration
accompanies
distribution
points
factual
review
application
determine
whether
individual
member
one
minority
groups
moreover
unlike
justice
powell
example
race
particular
black
applicant
considered
without
decisive
see
bakke
lsa
automatic
distribution
points
effect
making
factor
race
decisive
virtually
every
minimally
qualified
underrepresented
minority
applicant
also
instructive
consideration
lsa
system
example
provided
description
harvard
college
admissions
program
justice
powell
discussed
attached
opinion
bakke
example
included
illustrate
kind
significance
attached
race
harvard
college
program
provided
follows
admissions
committee
places
left
fill
might
find
forced
choose
child
successful
black
physician
academic
community
promise
superior
academic
performance
black
grew
ghetto
parents
whose
academic
achievement
lower
demonstrated
energy
leadership
well
apparently
abiding
interest
black
power
good
number
black
students
much
like
like
already
admitted
committee
might
prefer
vice
versa
white
student
extraordinary
artistic
talent
also
seeking
one
remaining
places
unique
quality
might
give
edge
thus
critical
criteria
often
individual
qualities
experience
dependent
upon
race
sometimes
associated
ibid
emphasis
added
example
demonstrates
problematic
nature
lsa
admissions
system
even
student
extraordinary
artistic
talent
rivaled
monet
picasso
applicant
receive
five
points
lsa
system
see
app
time
every
single
underrepresented
minority
applicant
including
students
automatically
receive
points
submitting
application
clearly
lsa
system
offer
applicants
individualized
selection
process
described
harvard
example
instead
considering
differing
backgrounds
experiences
characteristics
students
might
benefit
university
admissions
counselors
reviewing
lsa
applications
simply
award
points
applications
indicate
student
receive
points
extraordinary
talent
respondents
emphasize
fact
lsa
created
possibility
applicant
file
flagged
individualized
consideration
arc
think
flagging
program
emphasizes
flaws
university
system
whole
compared
described
justice
powell
students
illustrate
point
first
student
never
flagged
university
conceded
effect
automatically
awarding
points
virtually
every
qualified
underrepresented
minority
applicant
admitted
student
applicant
promise
superior
academic
performance
certainly
fit
description
thus
result
automatic
distribution
points
university
never
consider
student
individual
background
experiences
characteristics
assess
individual
potential
contribution
diversity
bakke
supra
instead
every
applicant
like
student
simply
admitted
possible
students
flagged
considered
individuals
assumes
student
already
admitted
automatic
distribution
student
muster
least
additional
points
fact
review
committee
look
applications
individually
ignore
points
application
flagged
tr
oral
arg
little
comfort
strict
scrutiny
analysis
record
reveal
precisely
many
applications
flagged
individualized
consideration
undisputed
consideration
exception
rule
operation
lsa
admissions
program
see
app
pet
cert
arc
reviews
portion
applications
bulk
admissions
decisions
executed
based
selection
index
score
parameters
set
ewg
additionally
individualized
review
provided
admissions
counselors
automatically
distribute
university
version
plus
makes
race
decisive
factor
virtually
every
minimally
qualified
underrepresented
minority
applicant
respondents
contend
volume
applications
presentation
applicant
information
make
impractical
lsa
use
admissions
system
upheld
today
grutter
brief
respondents
fact
implementation
program
capable
providing
individualized
consideration
might
present
administrative
challenges
render
constitutional
otherwise
problematic
system
see
croson
plurality
opinion
brennan
rejecting
determinant
constitutionality
face
suspect
classification
nothing
justice
powell
opinion
bakke
signaled
university
may
employ
whatever
means
desires
achieve
stated
goal
diversity
without
regard
limits
imposed
strict
scrutiny
analysis
conclude
therefore
university
use
race
current
freshman
admissions
policy
narrowly
tailored
achieve
respondents
asserted
compelling
interest
diversity
admissions
policy
violates
equal
protection
clause
fourteenth
find
admissions
policy
also
violates
title
vi
accordingly
reverse
portion
district
decision
granting
respondents
summary
judgment
respect
liability
remand
case
proceedings
consistent
opinion
ordered
jennifer
gratz
patrick
hamacher
petitioners
lee
bollinger
et
al
writ
certiorari
appeals
sixth
circuit
june
justice
concurring
unlike
law
school
admissions
policy
upholds
today
grutter
bollinger
post
procedures
employed
university
michigan
university
office
undergraduate
admissions
provide
meaningful
individualized
review
applicants
cf
regents
univ
cal
bakke
principal
opinion
powell
law
school
considers
various
diversity
qualifications
applicant
including
race
basis
see
grutter
bollinger
post
contrast
office
undergraduate
admissions
relies
selection
index
assign
every
underrepresented
minority
applicant
automatic
bonus
without
consideration
particular
background
experiences
qualities
individual
applicant
cf
ante
mechanized
selection
index
score
large
automatically
determines
admissions
decision
applicant
selection
index
thus
precludes
admissions
counselors
conducting
type
individualized
consideration
opinion
grutter
supra
requires
consideration
applicant
individualized
qualifications
including
contribution
individual
race
ethnic
identity
make
diversity
student
body
taking
account
diversity
within
among
racial
ethnic
groups
cf
ante
citing
bakke
supra
summary
judgment
district
held
admissions
policy
university
instituted
continues
use
today
passed
constitutional
muster
see
supp
ed
proposed
summary
undisputed
facts
parties
jointly
stipulated
admission
policy
mechanics
app
pet
cert
university
receives
application
admission
incoming
class
admissions
counselor
turns
selection
index
worksheet
calculate
applicant
selection
index
score
maximum
possible
points
procedure
university
began
using
app
applicants
score
automatically
admitted
applicants
scores
categorized
admit
postpone
applicants
points
postponed
admitted
applicants
points
delayed
postponed
applicants
points
fewer
delayed
rejected
office
undergraduate
admissions
extends
offers
admission
rolling
basis
acts
upon
applications
received
periodic
ass
ction
app
calculating
applicant
selection
index
score
counselors
assign
numerical
values
broad
range
academic
factors
well
variables
university
considers
important
assembling
diverse
student
body
including
race
points
assigned
academic
performance
points
assigned
nonacademic
factors
michigan
residents
example
receive
points
children
alumni
receive
counselors
may
assign
outstanding
essay
points
may
award
points
applicant
personal
achievement
leadership
public
service
importantly
case
applicant
automatically
receives
point
bonus
possesses
one
following
miscellaneous
factors
membership
underrepresented
minority
group
attendance
predominantly
minority
disadvantaged
high
school
recruitment
athletics
university
added
another
layer
review
admissions
process
admissions
counselor
tabulated
applicant
selection
index
score
may
flag
application
consideration
admissions
review
committee
composed
members
office
undergraduate
admissions
office
provost
app
pet
cert
review
committee
meets
periodically
discuss
files
flagged
applicants
already
admitted
based
selection
index
parameters
app
discussing
flagged
application
committee
decides
whether
admit
defer
deny
applicant
ibid
counselors
may
flag
applicant
review
committee
academically
prepared
selection
index
score
least
residents
michigan
residents
possesses
one
several
qualities
valued
university
qualities
include
high
class
rank
unique
life
experiences
challenges
circumstances
interests
talents
socioeconomic
disadvantage
race
ethnicity
geography
app
pet
cert
counselors
also
discretion
flag
application
notwithstanding
high
selection
index
score
something
applicant
file
suggests
applicant
may
suitable
admission
app
finally
rare
circumstances
admissions
counselor
may
flag
applicant
selection
index
score
designated
levels
counselor
reason
believe
reading
entire
file
score
reflect
applicant
true
promise
ibid
ii
although
office
undergraduate
admissions
assign
points
soft
variables
race
points
available
diversity
contributions
leadership
service
personal
achievement
geographic
diversity
capped
much
lower
levels
even
outstanding
national
high
school
leader
never
receive
five
points
accomplishments
mere
quarter
points
automatically
assigned
underrepresented
minority
solely
based
fact
race
course
justice
powell
made
clear
bakke
university
need
necessarily
accor
diversity
factors
weight
weight
attributed
particular
quality
may
vary
year
year
depending
student
body
applicants
incoming
class
selection
index
setting
automatic
predetermined
point
allocations
soft
variables
ensures
diversity
contributions
applicants
individually
assessed
policy
stands
sharp
contrast
law
school
admissions
plan
enables
admissions
officers
make
nuanced
judgments
respect
contributions
applicant
likely
make
diversity
incoming
class
see
grutter
bollinger
post
law
school
admissions
program
adequately
ensures
factors
may
contribute
student
body
diversity
meaningfully
considered
alongside
race
admissions
decisions
potential
source
individualized
consideration
appears
admissions
review
committee
evidence
record
however
reveals
little
review
committee
actually
functions
evidence
indicates
committee
kind
afterthought
rather
integral
component
system
individualized
review
points
undisputed
committee
reviews
portion
applications
bulk
admissions
decisions
executed
based
selection
index
score
parameters
set
enrollment
working
group
ante
quoting
app
pet
cert
review
committee
thus
represents
necessarily
limited
exception
office
undergraduate
admissions
general
reliance
selection
index
indeed
record
reveal
many
applications
admissions
counselors
send
review
committee
year
university
pointed
evidence
demonstrating
meaningful
percentage
applicants
receives
level
discretionary
review
addition
eligibility
consideration
committee
based
automatic
levels
determined
reference
selection
index
scores
evidence
decisions
actually
made
type
individualized
consideration
used
given
circumstances
addition
admissions
review
committee
admissions
process
offset
apparent
absence
individualized
consideration
office
undergraduate
admissions
general
practices
reasons
record
us
support
conclusion
university
michigan
admissions
program
college
literature
science
arts
extent
considers
race
provides
necessary
individualized
consideration
university
course
remains
free
modify
system
cf
grutter
bollinger
post
current
system
understand
nonindividualized
mechanical
one
result
join
opinion
reversing
decision
district
jennifer
gratz
patrick
hamacher
petitioners
lee
bollinger
et
al
writ
certiorari
appeals
sixth
circuit
june
justice
thomas
concurring
join
opinion
believe
correctly
applies
precedents
including
today
decision
grutter
bollinger
post
similar
reasons
given
separate
opinion
case
see
post
opinion
concurring
part
dissenting
part
however
hold
state
use
racial
discrimination
higher
education
admissions
categorically
prohibited
equal
protection
clause
make
one
observation
university
michigan
college
literature
science
arts
lsa
admissions
policy
today
invalidates
suffer
additional
constitutional
defect
allowing
racial
discriminat
ion
among
groups
included
within
definition
underrepresented
minorities
grutter
post
opinion
post
thomas
concurring
part
dissenting
part
awards
underrepresented
minorities
racial
preference
lsa
policy
falls
however
sufficiently
allow
consideration
nonracial
distinctions
among
underrepresented
minority
applicants
today
decisions
university
may
racially
discriminate
groups
constituting
critical
mass
see
ibid
grutter
post
opinion
stating
racial
balancing
patently
unconstitutional
admissions
policy
however
must
allow
consideration
nonracial
distinctions
among
applicants
sides
single
permitted
racial
classification
see
ante
opinion
ante
concurring
jennifer
gratz
patrick
hamacher
petitioners
lee
bollinger
et
al
writ
certiorari
appeals
sixth
circuit
june
justice
breyer
concurring
judgment
concur
judgment
though
join
opinion
join
justice
opinion
except
insofar
joins
join
part
justice
ginsburg
dissenting
opinion
dissent
reversal
district
decision
agree
justice
ginsburg
implementing
constitution
equality
instruction
government
decisionmakers
may
properly
distinguish
policies
inclusion
exclusion
post
former
likely
prove
consistent
basic
constitutional
obligation
law
respect
individual
equally
see
amdt
jennifer
gratz
patrick
hamacher
petitioners
lee
bollinger
et
al
writ
certiorari
appeals
sixth
circuit
june
justice
stevens
justice
souter
joins
dissenting
petitioners
seek
relief
enjoining
university
michigan
continuing
use
current
freshman
admissions
policy
yet
unlike
plaintiff
grutter
bollinger
post
petitioners
case
already
enrolled
schools
filed
complaint
case
neither
petitioner
process
reapplying
michigan
freshman
admissions
process
time
suit
filed
neither
done
since
total
absence
evidence
either
petitioner
receive
benefit
prospective
relief
sought
lawyer
unidentified
members
class
may
well
standing
seek
prospective
relief
clear
neither
petitioner
precedents
therefore
require
dismissal
action
petitioner
jennifer
gratz
applied
admission
university
michigan
university
college
literature
science
arts
lsa
undergraduate
freshman
class
university
delayed
action
application
placed
name
extended
waiting
list
gratz
decided
attend
university
michigan
dearborn
instead
graduated
petitioner
patrick
hamacher
applied
admission
lsa
undergraduate
freshman
class
university
postponed
decision
application
placed
name
extended
waiting
list
attended
michigan
state
university
graduating
complaint
petitioners
filed
october
hamacher
alleged
intends
apply
transfer
university
michigan
discriminatory
admissions
system
described
herein
eliminated
app
class
certification
stage
petitioners
sought
hamacher
represent
class
pursuant
federal
rule
civil
procedure
see
app
response
michigan
contended
hamacher
lacks
standing
represent
class
seeking
declaratory
injunctive
relief
michigan
submitted
hamacher
suffered
threat
imminent
future
given
already
enrolled
another
undergraduate
district
rejected
michigan
contention
concluding
hamacher
standing
seek
injunctive
relief
complaint
alleged
intended
apply
michigan
transfer
student
see
extent
plaintiff
hamacher
reapplies
university
michigan
face
race
continue
factor
admissions
district
accordingly
certified
hamacher
sole
class
representative
limited
claims
class
injunctive
declaratory
relief
see
subsequent
proceedings
district
held
admissions
system
effect
petitioners
applications
denied
unlawful
michigan
new
admissions
system
lawful
petitioners
sought
certiorari
michigan
review
district
judgment
concerning
admissions
policies
michigan
place
gratz
hamacher
applied
admission
respectively
see
brief
respondents
accordingly
us
portion
district
judgment
upheld
michigan
new
freshman
admissions
policy
ii
hamacher
gratz
course
standing
seek
damages
compensation
alleged
wrongful
denial
respective
applications
michigan
old
freshman
admissions
system
however
like
plaintiff
los
angeles
lyons
standing
recover
damages
caused
chokeholds
administered
police
past
standing
seek
injunctive
relief
preventing
future
chokeholds
petitioners
past
injuries
give
standing
obtain
injunctive
relief
protect
third
parties
similar
harms
see
ast
exposure
illegal
conduct
show
present
case
controversy
regarding
injunctive
relief
unaccompanied
continuing
present
adverse
effects
quoting
littleton
seek
injunctive
relief
petitioners
must
show
face
imminent
threat
future
injury
see
adarand
constructors
peña
given
suit
filed
neither
faced
impending
threat
future
injury
based
michigan
new
freshman
admissions
even
though
scintilla
evidence
freshman
admissions
program
administered
respondents
ever
impact
either
hamacher
gratz
petitioners
nonetheless
argue
hamacher
personal
stake
suit
time
complaint
filed
hamacher
intended
apply
transfer
michigan
certain
admission
policy
changes
see
app
see
also
tr
oral
arg
petitioners
attempt
base
hamacher
standing
suit
hypothetical
transfer
application
fails
several
reasons
first
evidence
hamacher
ever
actually
applied
admission
transfer
student
michigan
claim
future
injury
best
conjectural
hypothetical
rather
real
immediate
littleton
second
petitioners
counsel
conceded
oral
argument
transfer
policy
addressed
district
see
tr
oral
arg
admitting
transfer
admissions
policy
unlike
university
freshman
policy
detailed
great
length
joint
appendix
filed
specifics
transfer
policy
conspicuously
missing
joint
appendix
filed
furthermore
transfer
policy
discussed
anywhere
parties
briefs
ever
even
referenced
district
opinion
upheld
michigan
new
freshman
admissions
policy
struck
michigan
old
policy
nonetheless
evidence
filed
district
michigan
demonstrates
criteria
used
evaluate
transfer
applications
michigan
differ
significantly
criteria
used
evaluate
freshman
undergraduate
applications
special
significance
michigan
freshman
admissions
policy
example
provides
points
added
selection
index
scores
minority
applicants
see
ante
contrast
michigan
use
points
transfer
policy
applicants
including
minority
socioeconomically
disadvantaged
applicants
generally
admitted
possess
certain
qualifications
including
undergraduate
grade
point
average
gpa
sophomore
standing
high
school
gpa
record
exh
differences
hamacher
base
right
complain
freshman
admissions
policy
hypothetical
injury
wholly
separate
transfer
policy
right
complain
one
administrative
deficiency
automatically
conferred
right
complain
administrative
deficiencies
citizen
aggrieved
one
respect
bring
whole
structure
state
administration
courts
review
lewis
casey
emphasis
original
see
also
blum
yaretsky
plaintiff
subject
injurious
conduct
one
kind
possess
virtue
injury
necessary
stake
litigating
conduct
another
kind
although
similar
third
differences
freshman
transfer
admissions
policies
make
extremely
unlikely
best
injunction
requiring
respondents
modify
freshman
admissions
program
impact
michigan
transfer
policy
see
allen
wright
elief
injury
must
follow
favorable
decision
schlesinger
reservists
comm
stop
war
discrete
factual
context
within
concrete
injury
occurred
threatened
insures
framing
relief
broader
required
precise
facts
ruling
applied
especially
true
light
petitioners
unequivocal
disavowal
request
equitable
relief
totally
preclude
use
race
processing
admissions
applications
see
tr
oral
arg
majority
asserts
petitioners
challenged
use
race
university
undergraduate
admissions
freshman
transfer
alike
ante
emphasis
original
yet
questioned
oral
argument
whether
petitioners
challenge
impact
private
public
universities
petitioners
counsel
stated
honor
want
clear
arguing
today
suggesting
absolute
rule
forbidding
use
race
circumstances
arguing
interest
asserted
university
amorphous
unlimited
interest
diversity
compelling
interest
tr
oral
arg
emphasis
added
addition
asked
whether
petitioners
took
position
permissible
use
race
remedy
past
discrimination
petitioners
lawyer
stated
go
far
may
reasons
think
extraordinary
rare
consistent
statements
petitioners
briefs
filed
attack
university
asserted
interest
diversity
acknowledge
race
considered
remedial
reasons
see
brief
petitioners
michigan
transfer
policy
challenged
petitioners
see
supra
know
whether
michigan
defend
transfer
policy
diversity
grounds
whether
might
try
justify
transfer
policy
grounds
remedial
interest
petitioners
counsel
therefore
incorrect
asserting
oral
argument
university
asserted
interest
diversity
struck
rationale
law
respect
transfer
policy
respect
original
freshman
admissions
policy
tr
oral
arg
majority
likewise
mistaken
assuming
university
use
race
undergraduate
transfer
admissions
implicate
significantly
different
set
concerns
use
race
undergraduate
freshman
admissions
ante
transfer
policy
never
subject
suit
simply
know
whether
michigan
defend
transfer
policy
diversity
grounds
grounds
absence
point
system
transfer
policy
might
impact
narrow
tailoring
analysis
policy
bottom
petitioners
interest
obtaining
injunction
benefit
younger
third
parties
comparable
unemancipated
minor
standing
litigate
behalf
older
women
matheson
medicaid
patients
transferred
less
intensive
care
standing
litigate
behalf
patients
objecting
transfers
intensive
care
facilities
blum
yaretsky
standing
elementary
petitioners
interests
must
implicated
neither
petitioner
personal
stake
suit
prospective
relief
neither
standing
iii
true
petitioners
complaint
filed
class
action
hamacher
certified
representative
class
whose
members
may
well
standing
challenge
lsa
freshman
admissions
program
presently
effect
fact
suit
may
class
action
adds
nothing
question
standing
even
named
plaintiffs
represent
class
allege
show
personally
injured
injury
suffered
unidentified
members
class
belong
purport
represent
simon
eastern
ky
welfare
rights
organization
quoting
warth
seldin
see
also
conte
newberg
class
actions
ed
ne
acquire
individual
standing
virtue
bringing
class
action
thus
blum
squarely
held
interests
members
class
satisfy
requirement
class
representatives
personal
interest
obtaining
particular
equitable
relief
sought
class
blum
included
patients
wanted
hearing
transferred
facilities
receive
intensive
care
class
representatives
however
category
patients
threatened
transfer
less
intensive
care
facilities
explaining
named
class
representatives
base
standing
sue
injury
suffered
members
class
stated
respondents
suggest
members
class
represent
transferred
higher
levels
care
result
utilization
review
committee
decisions
respondents
however
allege
show
personally
injured
injury
suffered
unidentified
members
class
belong
purport
represent
warth
seldin
unless
individuals
thus
demonstrate
requisite
case
controversy
personally
petitioners
none
may
seek
relief
behalf
member
class
littleton
ibid
much
like
class
representatives
blum
hamacher
sole
class
representative
case
meet
article
iii
threshold
requirement
unidentified
members
class
represents
may
well
standing
challenge
michigan
current
freshman
admissions
policy
hamacher
base
standing
sue
injuries
suffered
members
class
iv
case
comes
us
precedents
leave
us
alternative
dismiss
writ
lack
jurisdiction
neither
petitioner
personal
stake
outcome
case
neither
standing
seek
prospective
relief
behalf
unidentified
class
members
may
may
standing
litigate
behalf
accordingly
respectfully
dissent
jennifer
gratz
patrick
hamacher
petitioners
lee
bollinger
et
al
writ
certiorari
appeals
sixth
circuit
june
justice
souter
justice
ginsburg
joins
part
ii
dissenting
agree
justice
stevens
patrick
hamacher
standing
seek
declaratory
injunctive
relief
freshman
admissions
policy
never
cause
harm
write
separately
note
even
new
gloss
law
standing
permit
reach
issue
decides
today
majority
chosen
address
merits
also
add
word
say
even
merits
reachable
dissent
judgment
finding
article
iii
standing
rests
two
propositions
first
university
michigan
undergraduate
college
transfer
policy
freshman
admissions
policy
seek
achieve
student
body
diversity
use
race
ante
second
hamacher
standing
challenge
transfer
policy
grounds
diversity
never
compelling
state
interest
justifying
use
race
admissions
decision
freshman
transfer
ante
concludes
hamacher
argument
successful
seal
fate
policies
standing
challenge
transfer
policy
also
allows
attack
freshman
admissions
policy
ante
etitioners
challenged
use
race
university
promote
diversity
including
transfer
policy
ibid
university
considers
race
purpose
achieve
diversity
believe
compelling
struck
rationale
result
respect
transfer
policy
respect
freshman
admissions
policy
quoting
tr
oral
arg
agree
justice
stevens
critique
thus
ignores
basic
principle
article
iii
standing
tiff
challenge
government
program
apply
see
ante
dissenting
opinion
even
indulgent
standing
theory
decision
go
beyond
recognition
diversity
serve
compelling
state
interest
justifying
decisions
education
ante
citing
grutter
bollinger
post
since
says
petitioners
raise
narrow
tailoring
challenge
transfer
policy
ante
decision
grutter
fatal
hamacher
sole
attack
upon
transfer
policy
policy
claims
aggrieved
hamacher
challenge
policy
failed
standing
presumably
spent
question
whether
freshman
admissions
plan
narrowly
tailored
achieving
student
body
diversity
remains
legally
irrelevant
hamacher
await
plaintiff
actually
hurt
ii
cases
contain
two
pointers
toward
line
valid
unconstitutional
admissions
schemes
grutter
reaffirms
permissibility
individualized
consideration
race
achieve
diversity
students
least
race
assigned
preordained
value
cases
hand
justice
powell
opinion
regents
univ
cal
bakke
rules
racial
quota
race
sole
fact
eligibility
certain
places
class
although
freshman
admissions
system
subject
argument
merits
think
closer
grutter
approves
bakke
condemns
held
unconstitutional
current
record
record
describe
system
quota
like
one
struck
bakke
insulate
nonminority
candidates
competition
certain
seats
bakke
supra
opinion
powell
see
also
richmond
croson
plurality
opinion
stating
bakke
invalidated
plan
completely
eliminated
nonminorities
consideration
specified
percentage
opportunities
bakke
plan
focused
solely
ethnic
diversity
effectively
told
nonminority
applicants
matter
strong
qualifications
quantitative
extracurricular
including
potential
contribution
educational
diversity
never
afforded
chance
compete
applicants
preferred
groups
special
admissions
seats
bakke
supra
opinion
powell
emphasis
original
plan
contrast
lets
applicants
compete
places
values
applicant
offering
place
grounds
race
grades
test
scores
strength
high
school
quality
course
study
residence
alumni
relationships
leadership
personal
character
socioeconomic
disadvantage
athletic
ability
quality
personal
essay
ante
nonminority
applicant
scores
highly
categories
readily
garner
selection
index
exceeding
minority
applicant
gets
bonus
cf
johnson
transportation
agency
santa
clara
upholding
program
gender
one
numerous
factors
taken
account
arriving
decision
persons
automatically
excluded
consideration
able
qualifications
weighed
applicants
emphasis
deleted
subject
one
qualification
taken
scheme
considering
selection
index
system
characteristics
college
thinks
relevant
student
diversity
every
one
student
places
filled
fits
justice
powell
description
constitutionally
acceptable
program
one
considers
pertinent
elements
diversity
light
particular
qualifications
applicant
places
element
footing
consideration
although
necessarily
according
weight
bakke
supra
words
characteristic
particular
applicant
considered
assessing
applicant
entire
application
ante
unsuccessful
nonminority
applicant
complain
rejected
simply
right
color
applicant
rejected
combined
qualifications
outweigh
applicant
given
opportunity
compete
applicants
bakke
supra
opinion
powell
one
qualification
description
admissions
process
membership
underrepresented
minority
given
weight
points
scale
face
things
however
assignment
specific
points
set
race
apart
weighted
considerations
nonminority
students
may
receive
points
athletic
ability
socioeconomic
disadvantage
attendance
socioeconomically
disadvantaged
predominantly
minority
high
school
provost
discretion
may
also
receive
points
residents
michigan
residence
underrepresented
michigan
county
leadership
service
nonetheless
finds
fault
scheme
automatically
distributes
points
minority
applicants
consideration
accompanies
distribution
points
factual
review
application
determine
whether
individual
member
one
minority
groups
ante
objection
goes
use
points
quantify
compare
characteristics
number
points
awarded
due
race
either
reading
objection
mistaken
nature
college
permissible
practice
awarding
value
racial
diversity
means
race
must
considered
way
increases
applicants
chances
admission
since
college
admission
left
entirely
inarticulate
intuition
hard
see
inappropriate
assigning
stated
value
relevant
characteristic
whether
reasoning
ability
writing
style
running
speed
minority
race
justice
powell
plus
factors
necessarily
assigned
values
college
simply
numbered
scale
law
school
accomplishes
holistic
review
grutter
post
distinction
imply
applicants
undergraduate
college
denied
individualized
consideration
fair
chance
compete
basis
various
merits
applications
may
disclose
possible
say
points
convert
race
decisive
factor
comparable
reserving
minority
places
bakke
course
conceive
point
system
plus
factor
given
minority
applicants
extreme
guarantee
every
minority
applicant
higher
rank
every
nonminority
applicant
university
admissions
system
see
opinion
powell
petitioners
convincing
argument
freshman
admissions
system
operates
way
present
record
obviously
shows
nonminority
applicants
may
achieve
higher
selection
point
totals
minority
applicants
owing
characteristics
race
fact
university
admits
virtually
every
qualified
minority
applicant
app
pet
cert
may
reflect
nothing
likelihood
qualified
minority
applicants
apply
brief
respondents
bollinger
et
al
well
possibility
results
strong
minority
applicant
pool
suffices
district
consideration
applicant
whole
spectrum
ability
ruled
giving
points
race
giving
points
athletic
ability
socioeconomic
disadvantage
argument
tailoring
amounts
boils
claim
plus
factor
points
makes
observers
suspicious
factor
points
might
suspicion
carry
petitioners
ultimate
burden
persuasion
constitutional
challenge
wygant
jackson
bd
plurality
opinion
powell
surely
warrant
condemning
college
admissions
scheme
record
district
correctly
view
believe
specific
point
assignment
constitutionally
troubling
made
limited
general
findings
characteristics
university
admissions
practice
conduct
individualized
review
admissions
review
committee
supp
ed
indicates
know
little
actual
role
review
committee
ante
record
reveal
precisely
many
applications
flagged
individualized
consideration
committee
see
also
ante
concurring
evidence
record
reveals
little
review
committee
actually
functions
point
system
operate
de
facto
greater
admissions
process
including
review
committee
results
individualized
review
sufficient
meet
standards
since
record
quiet
silent
work
committee
defensible
ground
vacating
remanding
evidence
committee
specific
without
knowing
admissions
review
committee
actually
functions
seems
especially
unfair
treat
candor
admissions
plan
achilles
heel
contrast
college
forthrightness
saying
plus
factor
gives
membership
underrepresented
minority
worth
considering
character
one
alternative
thrown
preferable
supposedly
based
race
drawing
admissions
systems
used
public
universities
california
florida
texas
contends
michigan
get
student
diversity
satisfaction
compelling
interest
guaranteeing
admission
fixed
percentage
top
students
high
school
michigan
brief
amicus
curiae
brief
amicus
curiae
grutter
bollinger
pp
nothing
unconstitutional
practice
nonetheless
suffers
serious
disadvantage
deliberate
obfuscation
percentage
plans
race
conscious
point
scheme
fairly
get
racially
diverse
results
without
saying
directly
contrast
michigan
purpose
directly
doubtful
case
tempted
give
michigan
extra
point
frankness
equal
protection
become
exercise
winners
ones
hide
ball
iii
plan
challenged
plaintiff
proper
standing
article
iii
affirm
judgment
district
granting
summary
judgment
college
vacate
judgment
lack
jurisdiction
respectfully
dissent
ginsburg
jennifer
gratz
patrick
hamacher
petitioners
lee
bollinger
et
al
writ
certiorari
appeals
sixth
circuit
june
justice
ginsburg
justice
souter
joins
dissenting
educational
institutions
acknowledges
barred
consideration
race
making
admissions
decisions
ante
see
grutter
bollinger
post
maintains
standard
review
controls
judicial
inspection
official
race
classifications
ante
quoting
adarand
constructors
peña
richmond
croson
plurality
opinion
insistence
consistency
adarand
fitting
nation
free
vestiges
rank
discrimination
long
reinforced
law
see
ginsburg
dissenting
far
distant
overtly
discriminatory
past
effects
centuries
inequality
remain
painfully
evident
communities
schools
wake
system
racial
caste
recently
ended
ginsburg
dissenting
large
disparities
endure
access
health
vary
disproportionately
race
neighborhoods
schools
remain
racially
hispanic
children
often
educated
underperforming
adult
hispanics
generally
earn
less
whites
equivalent
levels
equally
credentialed
job
applicants
receive
different
receptions
depending
irrational
prejudice
still
encountered
real
estate
consumer
bias
conscious
unconscious
reflecting
traditional
unexamined
habits
thought
keeps
barriers
must
come
equal
opportunity
nondiscrimination
ever
genuinely
become
country
law
practice
ginsburg
dissenting
see
generally
krieger
civil
rights
perestroika
intergroup
relations
affirmative
action
rev
constitution
instructs
act
government
may
deny
person
equal
protection
laws
amdt
implementing
equality
instruction
see
government
decisionmakers
may
properly
distinguish
policies
exclusion
inclusion
see
wygant
jackson
bd
stevens
dissenting
actions
designed
burden
groups
long
denied
full
citizenship
stature
sensibly
ranked
measures
taken
hasten
day
entrenched
discrimination
effects
extirpated
see
carter
victims
happen
black
yale
say
two
centuries
struggle
basic
civil
rights
mostly
freedom
racial
categorization
rather
freedom
racial
oppressio
trivialize
lives
deaths
suffered
racism
pretend
issue
presented
regents
univ
cal
bakke
issue
brown
board
education
pretend
history
never
happened
present
jurisprudence
ranks
race
suspect
category
race
inevitably
impermissible
classification
one
usually
national
shame
drawn
purpose
maintaining
racial
inequality
norwalk
core
norwalk
redevelopment
agency
omitted
race
considered
purpose
achieving
equality
automatic
proscription
order
insightfully
explained
constitution
color
blind
color
conscious
avoid
conflict
equal
protection
clause
classification
denies
benefit
causes
harm
imposes
burden
must
based
race
sense
constitution
color
blind
constitution
color
conscious
prevent
discrimination
perpetuated
undo
effects
past
discrimination
jefferson
county
bd
wisdom
see
wechsler
nationalization
civil
liberties
civil
rights
supp
tex
brown
may
seen
disallowing
racial
classifications
impl
invidious
assessment
allowing
classifications
invidious
implication
advanced
correct
inequalities
contemporary
human
rights
documents
draw
line
distinguish
policies
oppression
measures
designed
accelerate
de
facto
equality
see
grutter
post
ginsburg
concurring
citing
conventions
elimination
forms
racial
discrimination
elimination
forms
discrimination
women
mere
assertion
laudable
governmental
purpose
course
immunize
measure
careful
judicial
inspection
see
jefferson
county
criterion
relevancy
color
legitimate
governmental
close
review
needed
ferret
classifications
reality
malign
masquerading
benign
adarand
ginsburg
dissenting
ensure
preferences
large
trammel
unduly
upon
opportunities
others
interfere
harshly
legitimate
expectations
persons
groups
ii
examining
light
admissions
policy
employed
university
michigan
college
literature
science
arts
college
reasons
well
stated
justice
souter
see
constitutional
infirmity
see
ante
dissenting
opinion
like
institutions
college
many
applicants
admission
accommodate
entering
class
app
pet
cert
every
applicant
admitted
current
plan
petitioners
dispute
qualified
attend
college
racial
ethnic
groups
college
accords
special
consideration
hispanics
historically
relegated
inferior
status
law
social
practice
members
continue
experience
discrimination
day
see
supra
suggestion
college
adopted
current
policy
order
limit
decrease
enrollment
particular
racial
ethnic
group
seats
reserved
basis
race
see
brief
respondents
tr
oral
arg
range
points
review
committee
may
look
applications
individually
ignore
points
demonstration
college
program
unduly
constricts
admissions
opportunities
students
receive
special
consideration
based
race
cf
liu
causation
fallacy
bakke
basic
arithmetic
selective
admissions
rev
admissions
process
applicants
greatly
outnumber
admittees
white
applicants
greatly
outnumber
minority
applicants
substantial
preferences
minority
applicants
significantly
diminish
odds
admission
facing
white
applicants
stain
generations
racial
oppression
still
visible
society
see
krieger
determination
hasten
removal
remains
vital
one
reasonably
anticipate
therefore
colleges
universities
seek
maintain
minority
enrollment
networks
opportunities
thereby
opened
minority
graduates
whether
full
candor
adoption
affirmative
action
plans
kind
issue
without
recourse
plans
institutions
higher
education
may
resort
camouflage
example
schools
may
encourage
applicants
write
cultural
traditions
essays
submit
indicate
whether
english
second
language
seeking
improve
chances
admission
applicants
may
highlight
minority
group
associations
belong
hispanic
surnames
mothers
grandparents
turn
teachers
recommendations
may
emphasize
student
much
accomplished
see
steinberg
using
synonyms
race
college
strives
diversity
times
section
describing
admissions
process
rice
university
cf
brief
amicus
curiae
suggesting
institutions
consider
inter
alia
history
overcoming
disadvantage
reputation
location
high
school
individual
outlook
reflected
essays
honesty
best
policy
surely
michigan
accurately
described
fully
disclosed
college
affirmative
action
program
preferable
achieving
similar
numbers
winks
nods
reasons
stated
affirm
judgment
district
footnotes
although
hamacher
indicated
intend
ed
apply
transfer
lsa
discriminatory
admissions
system
eliminated
since
graduated
michigan
state
university
app
university
michigan
board
regents
subsequently
named
proper
defendant
place
university
lsa
see
duderstadt
president
university
time
gratz
application
consideration
sued
individual
capacity
bollinger
president
university
hamacher
applied
admission
originally
sued
individual
official
capacities
longer
president
university
group
latino
students
applied
intended
apply
admission
university
well
citizens
affirmative
action
preservation
nonprofit
organization
michigan
sought
intervene
pursuant
federal
rule
civil
procedure
see
app
district
originally
denied
request
see
sixth
circuit
reversed
decision
see
gratz
bollinger
district
decided
also
consider
petitioners
request
injunctive
declaratory
relief
liability
phase
proceedings
app
description
taken
large
part
joint
proposed
summary
undisputed
facts
regarding
admissions
process
filed
parties
district
app
pet
cert
counselors
used
four
tables
different
groups
applicants
nonminority
applicants
applicants
minority
applicants
minority
applicants
two
tables
used
one
applicants
one
applicants
cell
two
tables
contained
separate
courses
action
minority
applicants
nonminority
applicants
whose
gpa
scores
scores
placed
cell
lsa
applicants
michigan
residents
must
accumulate
points
selection
index
criteria
flagged
applicants
need
accumulate
points
eligible
consideration
see
app
district
considered
rejected
arguments
supplemental
opinion
order
see
supp
ed
explained
failed
present
evidence
discrimination
alleged
continuing
effects
discrimination
real
justification
lsa
admissions
programs
agree
extent
reassert
justification
justification
university
never
asserted
throughout
course
litigation
affirm
district
disposition
issue
district
determined
respondents
bollinger
duderstadt
sued
individual
capacities
rev
stat
entitled
summary
judgment
based
doctrine
qualified
immunity
see
supp
petitioners
asked
review
aspect
district
decision
district
denied
board
regents
motion
summary
judgment
respect
petitioners
title
vi
claim
eleventh
amendment
immunity
grounds
see
respondents
asked
review
aspect
district
decision
equal
protection
clause
fourteenth
amendment
explains
state
shall
deny
person
within
jurisdiction
equal
protection
laws
title
vi
provides
person
shall
ground
race
color
national
origin
excluded
participation
denied
benefits
subjected
discrimination
program
activity
receiving
federal
financial
assistance
section
provides
persons
within
jurisdiction
shall
right
every
state
territory
make
enforce
contracts
full
equal
benefit
laws
proceedings
security
persons
property
enjoyed
white
citizens
finding
corroborated
hamacher
request
district
equir
lsa
college
offer
admission
transfer
student
app
although
resolve
whether
inquiry
case
appropriately
addressed
rubric
standing
adequacy
note
tension
prior
cases
regard
see
burns
standing
mootness
class
actions
search
consistency
rev
general
telephone
southwest
falcon
plaintiff
alleging
passed
promotion
race
adequate
representative
maintain
class
action
behalf
applicants
hired
employer
blum
yaretsky
class
representatives
transferred
lower
levels
medical
care
lacked
standing
challenge
transfers
higher
levels
care
university
guidelines
concededly
use
race
evaluating
freshman
transfer
applications
petitioners
challenged
use
race
university
undergraduate
admissions
transfer
admissions
policy
much
although
petitioners
raise
narrow
tailoring
challenge
transfer
policy
counsel
petitioners
repeatedly
explained
transfer
policy
petitioners
challenged
use
race
university
promote
diversity
including
transfer
policy
see
tr
oral
arg
transfer
policy
essentially
respect
consideration
race
transfer
policy
considers
race
transfer
policy
freshman
admissions
policy
fundamentally
respect
consider
race
admissions
process
way
discriminatory
university
considers
race
purpose
achieve
diversity
believe
compelling
struck
rationale
result
respect
transfer
policy
respect
freshman
admissions
policy
honor
indeed
litigation
history
case
demonstrates
device
save
resources
courts
parties
permitting
issue
potentially
affecting
every
class
member
litigated
economical
fashion
califano
yamasaki
case
therefore
quite
unlike
general
telephone
southwest
falcon
found
named
representative
passed
promotion
adequate
representative
absent
class
members
never
hired
first
instance
explained
plaintiff
evidentiary
approaches
individual
class
claims
entirely
different
attempted
sustain
individual
claim
proving
intentional
discrimination
tried
prove
class
claims
statistical
evidence
disparate
impact
clear
maintenance
respondent
action
class
action
advance
efficiency
economy
litigation
principal
purpose
procedure
quoting
american
pipe
constr
utah
davis
set
aside
seats
available
first
year
medical
school
program
economically
educationally
disadvantaged
applicants
also
members
designated
minority
groups
defined
university
extent
existed
pool
least
minimally
qualified
minority
applicants
fill
special
admissions
seats
white
applicants
compete
seats
entering
class
rather
open
minority
applicants
regents
univ
cal
bakke
principal
opinion
justice
powell
found
program
employed
impermissible
system
disregard
ed
individual
rights
guaranteed
fourteenth
amendment
reached
conclusion
even
though
university
argued
reservation
specified
number
seats
class
individuals
preferred
ethnic
groups
effective
means
serving
interest
diversity
ibid
justice
powell
concluded
arguments
misunderstood
nature
diversity
found
compelling
see
ibid
justice
souter
recognizes
lsa
use
race
decisive
practice
attempts
avoid
fact
unsupported
speculation
minorities
applicant
pool
see
post
dissenting
opinion
justice
souter
therefore
wrong
contends
applicants
undergraduate
college
denied
individualized
consideration
post
justice
explains
concurrence
lsa
program
ensures
diversity
contributions
applicants
individually
assessed
post
justice
souter
mistaken
assertion
take
upon
apply
newly
formulated
legal
standard
undeveloped
record
post
ignores
fact
respondents
told
us
necessary
decide
case
explained
respondents
concede
portion
applications
reviewed
arc
bulk
admissions
decisions
based
point
system
readily
apparent
availability
review
comes
automatic
distribution
points
far
limited
individualized
review
given
large
middle
group
applicants
discussed
justice
powell
described
harvard
plan
bakke
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
justice
ginsburg
dissent
observes
ne
reasonably
anticipate
colleges
universities
seek
maintain
minority
enrollment
whether
full
candor
adoption
affirmative
action
plans
kind
issue
post
goes
say
honesty
best
policy
surely
michigan
accurately
described
fully
disclosed
college
affirmative
action
program
preferable
achieving
similar
numbers
winks
nods
disguises
post
observations
remarkable
two
reasons
first
suggest
universities
whose
academic
judgment
told
grutter
bollinger
post
defer
pursue
programs
whether
violate
constitution
second
recommend
violations
dealt
requiring
universities
obey
constitution
changing
constitution
conforms
conduct
universities
explained
discrimination
violates
equal
protection
clause
fourteenth
amendment
committed
institution
accepts
federal
funds
also
constitutes
violation
title
vi
see
alexander
sandoval
fordice
alexander
choate
likewise
respect
explained
provision
meant
broad
terms
proscribe
discrimination
making
enforcement
contracts
favor
race
mcdonald
santa
fe
trail
transp
furthermore
explained
contract
educational
services
contract
purposes
see
runyon
mccrary
finally
purposeful
discrimination
violates
equal
protection
clause
fourteenth
amendment
also
violate
see
general
building
contractors
pennsylvania
footnotes
breyer
joins
opinion
except
last
sentence
footnotes
challenging
use
race
admissions
michigan
law
school
barbara
grutter
alleged
complaint
attended
law
school
still
desires
attend
law
school
become
lawyer
app
petitioners
seek
gratz
represent
class
pursuant
federal
rule
civil
procedure
see
app
arguing
hamacher
lacked
standing
michigan
also
asserted
hamacher
need
achieve
grade
point
average
attempt
transfer
university
michigan
district
rejected
argument
concluding
hamacher
present
grades
factor
considered
time
responding
questions
petitioners
standing
oral
argument
petitioners
counsel
alluded
fact
michigan
might
continually
change
details
admissions
policy
see
tr
oral
arg
change
michigan
freshman
admissions
policy
however
reason
petitioners
establish
standing
seek
prospective
relief
rather
reason
lack
standing
seek
relief
suit
filed
neither
faced
real
immediate
threat
future
injury
michigan
freshman
admissions
policy
given
already
enrolled
institutions
adarand
constructors
peña
quoting
los
angeles
lyons
decision
obtain
college
education
elsewhere
distinguishes
case
allan
bakke
pursuit
medical
education
university
california
davis
see
regents
univ
cal
bakke
cf
defunis
odegaard
per
curiam
hamacher
clearly
longer
claim
intent
transfer
michigan
undergraduate
program
given
graduated
college
however
fact
alone
necessarily
fatal
instant
class
action
recognized
named
class
representative
standing
time
suit
initiated
class
actions
may
proceed
instances
following
mootness
named
class
representative
claim
see
sosna
iowa
holding
requisite
article
iii
case
controversy
may
exist
named
defendant
member
class
represented
named
plaintiff
even
though
claim
named
plaintiff
become
moot
franks
bowman
transp
problem
case
neither
gratz
hamacher
standing
assert
injunctive
claim
federal
time
suit
initiated
majority
view
standing
end
hamacher
ability
challenge
use
race
university
variety
programs
hamacher
right
complain
transfer
policy
gives
standing
challenge
freshman
policy
presumably
ability
complain
transfer
policy
likewise
enable
challenge
michigan
law
school
admissions
policy
well
admissions
policy
used
michigan
course
injury
hamacher
give
standing
claim
damages
past
harm
behalf
class
members
certified
class
representative
limited
purpose
seeking
injunctive
declaratory
relief
footnotes
holding
arguably
exposes
weakness
rule
blum
yaretsky
article
iii
standing
may
satisfied
unnamed
members
duly
certified
class
party
invited
us
reconsider
blum
follow
justice
stevens
approaching
case
assumption
blum
settled
law
matter
suggests
narrow
tailoring
challenges
two
policies
well
different
outcomes
ante
record
decisionmaking
process
transfer
applicants
understandably
thin
given
petitioners
never
raised
narrow
tailoring
challenge
importantly
however
transfer
policy
use
selection
index
evaluate
transfer
applicants
rather
considers
race
one
many
factors
making
general
determination
whether
applicant
make
diverse
student
body
ante
quoting
app
etc
capitalization
omitted
limited
glimpse
transfer
policy
least
permits
inference
university
engages
holistic
review
transfer
applications
consistent
program
upheld
today
grutter
bollinger
post
surmises
committee
contribute
meaningfully
university
individualized
review
applications
ante
take
upon
apply
legal
standard
undeveloped
record
given
district
statement
committee
may
examine
number
applicants
including
applicants
minority
applicants
supp
ed
quite
possible
factual
development
reveal
committee
source
individualized
consideration
sufficient
satisfy
rule
ante
concurring
determination
issue
first
instance
job
district
record
admittedly
lacking
course
might
pointless
state
michigan
minorities
much
smaller
fraction
population
california
florida
texas
brief
respondents
bollinger
et
al
footnotes
breyer
joins
part
opinion
see
dept
commerce
bureau
census
statistical
abstract
table
hereinafter
statistical
abstract
unemployment
rate
among
whites
years
unemployment
rate
among
respectively
among
hispanics
see
dept
commerce
bureau
census
poverty
table
whites
hispanics
living
poverty
staveteig
wigton
racial
ethnic
disparities
key
findings
national
survey
america
families
urban
institute
report
blacks
hispanics
native
americans
poverty
rates
almost
twice
high
asians
almost
three
times
high
see
dept
commerce
bureau
census
health
insurance
coverage
table
whites
without
health
insurance
compared
hispanics
waidmann
rajan
race
ethnic
disparities
health
care
access
utilization
examination
state
variation
med
care
res
rev
average
latinos
african
americans
worse
health
worse
access
effective
health
care
whites
see
dept
commerce
bureau
census
racial
ethnic
residential
segregation
documenting
residential
segregation
frankenberg
lee
orfield
multiracial
society
segregated
schools
losing
dream
http
internet
materials
visited
june
available
clerk
case
file
hites
segregated
group
nation
public
schools
attend
schools
average
eighty
percent
student
body
white
lmost
black
latino
students
attend
schools
predominantly
minority
one
six
black
children
attend
school
minority
one
nine
latino
students
attend
virtually
minority
see
ryan
schools
race
money
yale
urban
public
schools
attended
primarily
hispanic
students
students
attend
schools
disproportionately
poor
score
poorly
standardized
tests
far
likely
drop
students
attend
nonurban
see
statistical
abstract
table
see
holzer
career
advancement
prospects
strategies
minority
workers
workers
new
economy
kazis
miller
eds
studies
sent
matched
pairs
minority
white
applicants
apparently
equal
credentials
apply
jobs
whites
routinely
get
interviews
job
offers
either
black
hispanic
applicants
bertrand
mullainathan
emily
brendan
employable
lakisha
jamal
field
experiment
labor
market
discrimination
http
mincy
urban
institute
audit
studies
research
policy
context
clear
convincing
evidence
measurement
discrimination
america
fix
struyk
eds
see
turner
et
discrimination
metropolitan
housing
markets
national
results
phase
hds
pp
iii
http
paired
testing
two
individuals
one
minority
white
pose
otherwise
identical
homeseekers
visit
real
estate
rental
agents
inquire
availability
advertised
housing
units
revealed
discrimination
still
persists
rental
sales
markets
large
metropolitan
areas
nationwide
turner
skidmore
mortgage
lending
discrimination
review
existing
evidence
existing
research
evidence
shows
minority
homebuyers
face
discrimination
mortgage
lending
see
ayres
evidence
discrimination
new
car
negotiations
estimates
cause
rev
study
testers
negotiated
purchase
automobiles
confirmed
earlier
finding
dealers
systematically
offer
lower
prices
white
males
tester
types
points
percentage
plans
used
california
florida
texas
one
example
alternativ
permit
college
enroll
meaningful
numbers
minority
students
brief
amicus
curiae
see
commission
civil
rights
beyond
percentage
plans
challenge
equal
opportunity
higher
education
http
percentage
plans
guarantee
admission
state
universities
fixed
percentage
top
students
high
schools
state
calling
plans
seems
disingenuous
unquestionably
adopted
specific
purpose
increasing
representation
hispanics
public
higher
education
system
brief
respondents
see
horn
flores
percent
plans
college
admissions
comparative
analysis
three
experiences
http
percentage
plans
depend
effectiveness
continued
racial
segregation
secondary
school
level
ensure
significant
minority
enrollment
universities
high
school
population
large
enough
guarantee
many
schools
students
top
minorities
moreover
plans
link
college
admission
single
criterion
high
school
class
rank
create
perverse
incentives
encourage
parents
keep
children
segregated
schools
discourage
students
taking
challenging
classes
might
lower
grade
point
averages
see
selingo
saying
solution
chronicle
higher
education
june
even
percentage
plans
boost
sheer
numbers
minority
enrollees
undergraduate
level
touch
enrollment
graduate
professional
schools
contrary
contention
suggest
changing
constitution
conforms
conduct
universities
ante
view
constitution
properly
interpreted
permits
government
officials
respond
openly
continuing
importance
race
see
supra
among
constitutionally
permissible
options
candidly
disclose
consideration
race
seem
preferable
conceal