defunis
odegaard
argued
february
decided
april
denied
admission
law
school
petitioner
brought
suit
behalf
alone
injunctive
relief
claiming
school
admissions
policy
racially
discriminated
violation
equal
protection
clause
fourteenth
amendment
trial
agreed
ordered
school
admit
fall
washington
reversed
holding
school
admissions
policy
unconstitutional
justice
douglas
circuit
justice
stayed
judgment
pending
final
disposition
case
result
petitioner
final
school
year
considered
petition
certiorari
oral
argument
informed
petitioner
registered
final
quarter
respondents
assured
registration
fully
effective
regardless
ultimate
disposition
case
held
petitioner
complete
law
school
end
term
registered
regardless
decision
might
reach
merits
consistently
limitations
art
iii
constitution
consider
substantive
constitutional
issues
case
moot
mootness
depend
upon
voluntary
cessation
school
admissions
practices
upon
simple
fact
petitioner
final
term
school
fixed
policy
permit
complete
term
case
presents
question
capable
repetition
yet
evading
review
since
petitioner
never
go
school
admissions
process
since
follow
issue
petitioner
raises
future
evade
review
merely
case
reach
eve
petitioner
graduation
josef
diamond
argued
cause
petitioners
briefs
lyle
iversen
slade
gorton
attorney
general
washington
argued
cause
respondents
brief
james
wilson
senior
assistant
attorney
general
briefs
amici
curiae
urging
reversal
filed
milton
smith
gerard
smetana
jerry
kronenberg
chamber
commerce
albert
woll
laurence
gold
thomas
harris
american
federation
labor
congress
industrial
organizations
theodore
mann
american
jewish
congress
david
caplan
jewish
rights
council
anthony
fornelli
thaddeus
kowalski
samuel
rabinove
advocate
society
et
al
alexander
bickel
philip
kurland
larry
lavinsky
arnold
forster
league
briefs
amici
curiae
urging
affirmance
filed
william
brown
attorney
general
andrew
ruzicho
earl
manz
stephen
simmons
assistant
attorneys
general
state
ohio
john
harris
city
seattle
fletcher
baldwin
chesterfield
smith
american
bar
assn
archibald
cox
james
bierman
james
sharaf
daniel
steiner
president
fellows
harvard
college
harold
flannery
center
law
education
harvard
university
frank
askin
norman
amaker
board
governors
rutgers
state
university
new
jersey
et
al
edgar
cahn
jean
camper
cahn
deans
antioch
school
law
erwin
griswold
clifford
alloway
association
american
law
schools
john
holt
myers
association
american
medical
colleges
howard
glickstein
group
law
school
deans
harry
reese
peter
martin
law
school
admission
council
sanford
jay
rosen
herbert
teitelbaum
melvin
wulf
mexican
american
legal
defense
educational
fund
et
al
cruz
reynoso
robert
mckay
council
legal
education
opportunity
roswell
perkins
kenneth
bass
iii
david
tatel
stephen
browning
lawyers
committee
civil
rights
law
jack
greenberg
james
nabrit
iii
charles
stephen
ralston
jeffry
mintz
louis
pollak
john
baker
naacp
legal
defense
educational
fund
derrick
bell
national
conference
black
lawyers
bruce
greene
herbert
becker
american
indian
law
students
et
al
clifford
sweet
lyonel
jones
dennis
yeager
richard
larson
nathaniel
jones
michael
terry
joseph
matera
christopher
brown
legal
aid
society
alameda
county
et
al
peter
van
lockwood
david
bonderman
sylvia
roberts
david
rubin
national
organization
women
legal
defense
education
fund
et
al
joseph
rauh
national
council
jewish
women
et
al
per
curiam
petitioner
marco
defunis
applied
admission
student
university
washington
law
school
institution
size
incoming
class
limited
persons
law
school
received
applications
places
defunis
eventually
notified
denied
admission
thereupon
commenced
suit
washington
trial
contending
procedures
criteria
employed
law
school
admissions
committee
invidiously
discriminated
account
race
violation
equal
protection
clause
fourteenth
amendment
constitution
defunis
brought
suit
behalf
alone
representative
class
various
respondents
officers
faculty
members
members
board
regents
university
washington
asked
trial
issue
mandatory
injunction
commanding
respondents
admit
member
class
entering
september
ground
law
school
admissions
policy
resulted
unconstitutional
denial
application
admission
trial
agreed
claim
granted
requested
relief
defunis
accordingly
admitted
law
school
began
legal
studies
fall
appeal
washington
reversed
judgment
trial
held
law
school
admissions
policy
violate
constitution
time
defunis
second
year
law
school
petitioned
writ
certiorari
justice
douglas
circuit
justice
stayed
judgment
washington
pending
final
disposition
case
virtue
stay
defunis
remained
law
school
first
term
third
final
year
first
considered
certiorari
petition
fall
concern
defunis
standing
law
school
might
rendered
case
moot
requested
parties
brief
question
mootness
acted
petition
response
sides
contended
case
moot
respondents
indicated
decision
washington
permitted
stand
petitioner
complete
term
enrolled
apply
faculty
permission
continue
school
register
another
term
granted
petition
certiorari
november
case
due
course
orally
argued
february
response
questions
raised
bench
oral
argument
counsel
petitioner
informed
defunis
registered
final
quarter
law
school
counsel
respondents
made
clear
law
school
way
seek
abrogate
registration
light
defunis
recent
registration
last
quarter
final
law
school
year
law
school
assurance
registration
fully
effective
insistent
question
arises
whether
case
moot
question
turn
starting
point
analysis
familiar
proposition
federal
courts
without
power
decide
questions
affect
rights
litigants
case
north
carolina
rice
inability
federal
judiciary
review
moot
cases
derives
requirement
art
iii
constitution
exercise
judicial
power
depends
upon
existence
case
controversy
liner
jafco
see
also
powell
mccormack
sibron
new
york
although
matter
washington
state
law
appears
case
saved
mootness
great
public
interest
continuing
issues
raised
appeal
fact
remains
art
iii
ven
cases
arising
state
courts
question
mootness
federal
one
federal
must
resolve
assumes
jurisdiction
north
carolina
rice
supra
respondents
represented
without
regard
ultimate
resolution
issues
case
defunis
remain
student
law
school
duration
term
already
enrolled
since
registered
final
term
evident
given
opportunity
complete
academic
requirements
graduation
receive
diploma
regardless
decision
might
reach
merits
case
short
parties
agree
defunis
entitled
complete
legal
studies
university
washington
receive
degree
institution
determination
legal
issues
tendered
parties
longer
necessary
compel
result
serve
prevent
defunis
cast
suit
class
action
remedy
requested
injunction
commanding
admission
law
school
accorded
remedy
also
irrevocably
admitted
final
term
final
year
law
school
course
controversy
parties
thus
clearly
ceased
definite
concrete
longer
touch
es
legal
relations
parties
adverse
legal
interests
aetna
life
ins
haworth
matters
circumstances
partially
stem
policy
decision
part
respondent
law
school
authorities
respondents
counsel
attorney
general
state
professionally
represented
event
status
defunis
affected
view
might
express
merits
controversy
settled
practice
contexts
less
significant
fully
accept
representations
parameters
decision
see
gerende
election
board
whitehill
elkins
ehlert
cf
law
students
research
council
wadmond
line
decisions
standing
proposition
voluntary
cessation
allegedly
illegal
conduct
deprive
tribunal
power
hear
determine
case
make
case
moot
grant
freight
walling
helmerich
payne
gray
sanders
phosphate
export
decisions
doctrine
reflect
quite
relevant
question
mootness
arisen
reason
unilateral
change
admissions
procedures
law
school
admissions
procedures
target
litigation
voluntary
cessation
admissions
practices
complained
make
case
moot
said
assurance
reasonable
expectation
wrong
repeated
grant
supra
otherwise
defendant
free
return
old
ways
fact
enough
prevent
mootness
public
interest
legality
practices
settled
ibid
mootness
present
case
depends
upon
voluntary
cessation
admissions
practices
subject
litigation
depends
instead
upon
simple
fact
defunis
final
quarter
final
year
course
study
settled
unchallenged
policy
law
school
permit
complete
term
enrolled
might
also
suggested
case
presents
question
capable
repetition
yet
evading
review
southern
pacific
terminal
icc
roe
wade
thus
amenable
federal
adjudication
even
though
might
otherwise
considered
moot
defunis
never
required
run
gantlet
law
school
admission
process
question
certainly
capable
repetition
far
concerned
moreover
particular
case
reach
eve
petitioner
graduation
law
school
hardly
follows
issue
raises
future
evade
review
admissions
procedures
law
school
remain
unchanged
reason
suppose
subsequent
case
attacking
procedures
come
relative
speed
washington
spoken
case
therefore
way
presents
exceptional
situation
southern
pacific
terminal
doctrine
might
permit
departure
usual
rule
federal
cases
actual
controversy
must
exist
stages
appellate
certiorari
review
simply
date
action
initiated
roe
wade
supra
munsingwear
petitioner
complete
law
school
studies
end
term
registered
regardless
decision
might
reach
merits
litigation
conclude
consistently
limitations
art
iii
constitution
consider
substantive
constitutional
issues
tendered
parties
accordingly
judgment
washington
vacated
cause
remanded
proceedings
may
deemed
appropriate
ordered
footnotes
contrast
response
petition
certiorari
respondents
stated
defunis
complete
third
year
law
school
awarded
degree
end
academic
year
regardless
outcome
appeal
memorandum
question
mootness
counsel
respondents
unequivocally
stated
defunis
registers
spring
quarter
existing
order
registration
period
february
march
registration
canceled
unilaterally
university
regardless
outcome
litigation
response
inquiry
counsel
respondents
advised
changes
made
admissions
procedures
applicants
seeking
admission
university
washington
law
school
academic
year
commencing
september
respondents
counsel
however
changes
affect
policy
challenged
petitioners
special
consideration
still
given
applicants
certain
ethnic
groups
suggested
dissent
ny
number
unexpected
events
illness
economic
necessity
even
academic
failure
might
prevent
graduation
end
term
post
speculative
contingencies
afford
basis
passing
substantive
issues
petitioner
us
decide
hall
beals
absence
evidence
prospect
immediacy
reality
golden
zwickler
maryland
casualty
pacific
coal
oil
justice
douglas
dissenting
agree
justice
brennan
case
moot
significance
issues
raised
think
important
reach
merits
university
washington
law
school
received
applications
admission
class
beginning
september
spaces
available
students
order
enroll
number
school
eventually
offered
admission
applicants
applicants
put
two
groups
one
considered
minority
admissions
program
offered
admission
indicated
optional
question
application
dominant
ethnic
origin
either
black
chicano
american
indian
filipino
four
groups
included
minority
admissions
program
answers
optional
question
apparently
sole
basis
upon
eligibility
program
determined
eighteen
actually
enrolled
law
school
general
admissions
process
proceeded
follows
index
called
predicted
first
year
average
average
calculated
applicant
basis
formula
combining
applicant
score
law
school
admission
test
lsat
grades
last
two
years
college
basis
experience
previous
years
applications
admissions
committee
consisting
faculty
administration
students
concluded
outstanding
applicants
averages
highest
average
applicant
applicants
averages
considered
applications
arrived
random
distribution
files
members
committee
read
report
recommendations
back
committee
result
first
three
committee
meetings
february
march
april
applicants
group
admitted
although
virtually
applicants
offered
admission
early
final
conclusion
admissions
process
august
applicants
averages
admitted
including
applicants
averages
applicants
averages
also
beginning
early
admissions
process
culling
applicants
averages
reviewed
chairman
admissions
committee
authority
reject
summarily
without
consideration
rest
committee
small
number
applications
saved
chairman
committee
consideration
basis
information
file
indicating
greater
promise
suggested
average
finally
early
months
committee
accumulated
applications
averages
considered
later
time
applications
received
thus
compared
one
another
since
defunis
average
middle
group
beginning
may
meeting
committee
considered
middle
group
applicants
whose
folders
randomly
distributed
committee
members
recommendations
committee
also
considered
time
remaining
applicants
averages
summarily
rejected
averages
summarily
admitted
instead
held
consideration
committee
member
consider
applications
competitively
following
rough
guidelines
proportion
offered
admission
committee
extended
offers
admission
somewhat
applicants
waiting
list
constructed
fashion
divided
four
groups
ranked
committee
assessment
applications
defunis
waiting
list
ranked
lowest
quarter
ultimately
told
august
room
applicants
indicated
application
forms
either
black
chicano
american
indian
filipino
treated
differently
several
respects
whatever
averages
none
given
committee
chairman
consideration
summary
rejection
distributed
randomly
among
committee
members
consideration
along
applications
instead
applications
black
students
assigned
separately
two
particular
committee
members
black
law
student
committee
professor
committee
worked
previous
summer
special
program
disadvantaged
college
students
considering
application
law
school
applications
among
three
minority
groups
assigned
assistant
dean
committee
minority
applications
considered
competitively
one
another
never
directly
compared
remaining
applications
either
subcommittee
full
committee
admissions
process
generally
committee
sought
find
within
minority
category
persons
thought
highest
probability
succeeding
law
school
reviewing
minority
applications
committee
attached
less
weight
average
making
total
judgmental
evaluation
relative
ability
particular
applicant
succeed
law
school
publicly
distributed
guide
applicants
committee
explained
applicant
racial
ethnic
background
considered
one
factor
general
attempt
convert
formal
credentials
realistic
predictions
minority
applicants
admitted
procedure
averages
defunis
averages
thus
ordinarily
summarily
rejected
chairman
also
nonminority
applicants
admitted
averages
defunis
returning
veterans
see
supra
others
presumably
admitted
factors
applications
made
attractive
candidates
despite
relatively
low
averages
reasonable
conclude
facts
factors
considered
committee
occasion
crucial
average
applicants
heavily
weighted
factor
extremes
virtually
dispositive
different
balance
apparently
struck
however
regard
minority
applicants
indeed
oral
argument
respondents
counsel
advised
us
minority
applicants
considered
procedure
generally
used
none
eventually
enrolled
law
school
admitted
educational
policy
choices
confronting
university
admissions
committee
ordinarily
subject
judicial
oversight
clearly
us
law
school
decide
tests
employ
heavily
weigh
recommendations
professors
undergraduate
grades
level
achievement
chosen
criteria
sufficient
demonstrate
candidate
qualified
admission
places
case
special
category
fact
school
choose
one
set
criteria
two
determined
apply
given
applicant
basis
race
committee
adopted
policy
order
achieve
reasonable
representation
minority
groups
law
school
although
may
speculated
committee
sought
rectify
perceived
cultural
racial
biases
lsat
candidates
undergraduate
records
record
case
devoid
evidence
bias
school
sought
justify
procedures
basis
although
testifying
quota
law
school
dean
explained
want
reasonable
representation
go
reach
without
taking
people
unqualified
absolute
sense
statement
facts
unqualified
absolute
sense
dean
meant
candidates
reasonable
probable
likelihood
chance
succeeding
study
law
ibid
dean
conceded
reaching
school
take
minority
students
least
viewed
group
less
likelihood
majority
student
group
taken
whole
made
application
go
law
school
saying
taking
best
qualified
total
total
using
definition
yes
ii
time
law
schools
follow
advice
wigmore
believed
way
find
whether
boy
makings
competent
lawyer
see
first
year
law
studies
wigmore
juristic
psychopoyemetrology
find
whether
boy
makings
lawyer
rev
days
enough
spaces
admit
every
applicant
met
minimal
credentials
given
opportunity
prove
law
school
many
law
schools
found
admit
minimally
qualified
applicants
selection
process
began
pressure
use
kind
admissions
test
mounted
number
schools
instituted
one
early
precursor
modern
day
lsat
law
aptitude
examination
wigmore
conducted
study
test
student
volunteers
concluded
substantial
practical
value
conclusions
accepted
harried
law
schools
still
sought
kind
admissions
test
simplify
process
judging
applicants
lsat
born
us
ever
since
test
purports
predict
successful
applicant
first
year
law
school
consists
hours
worth
questions
answers
student
give
question
limited
creativity
intelligence
student
better
original
understanding
problem
may
realize
none
alternative
answers
good
way
demonstrate
understanding
obvious
nature
tests
give
candidate
significant
opportunity
express
subtle
choice
answers
go
yet
way
show
individuality
nonconformist
unusual
original
creative
many
truly
important
people
must
stifle
impulses
conform
best
norms
testers
set
unimaginative
scientific
way
profoundly
gifted
candidate
resentment
rise
mental
strait
jacket
testers
force
mind
hoffmann
tyranny
testing
make
tests
law
schools
use
point
course
high
correlations
test
scores
grades
law
school
first
year
winterbottom
comments
study
criteria
legal
education
admission
bar
article
thomas
goolsby
legal
ed
certainly
tests
seem
better
chance
value
deceptively
precise
scoring
system
suggests
proponents
data
show
example
scoring
bottom
test
better
law
school
indeed
six
every
top
law
school
class
one
knows
many
admitted
test
scores
fact
done
well
given
chance
many
relevant
factors
motivation
cultural
backgrounds
specific
minorities
test
measure
inevitably
must
impair
value
predictor
course
law
school
admits
highest
test
scores
finds
average
much
better
thus
test
convenient
tool
admissions
committee
price
paid
able
student
unknown
reasons
achieve
high
score
perhaps
even
minority
different
cultural
background
tests
least
past
aimed
eliminating
jews
school
safely
conclude
applicant
score
admitted
one
score
problem
many
cases
choice
numbers
create
illusion
difference
tending
overwhelm
factors
wiser
testers
well
aware
defects
format
danger
placing
reliance
one
method
assessment
exclusion
others
distressing
little
caveats
impressed
people
succumb
propaganda
use
tests
mechanically
though
valid
substitute
judgment
hoffmann
supra
course
tests
thing
considered
combined
prelaw
grades
produce
new
number
called
average
grades
problems
one
school
another
school
even
extent
formula
predicts
law
school
grades
value
limited
law
student
lower
grades
may
long
pull
legal
career
surpass
top
class
aw
school
admissions
criteria
operated
within
hermetically
sealed
system
beginning
leak
traditional
combination
lsat
gpa
undergraduate
grade
point
average
may
provided
acceptable
predictors
likely
performance
law
school
past
clear
evidence
lsat
gpa
provide
particularly
good
evaluators
intrinsic
enriched
ability
individual
perform
law
student
lawyer
functioning
society
undergoing
change
clear
evidence
grades
evaluators
law
school
performance
bar
examination
particularly
good
predictors
competence
success
lawyer
rosen
equalizing
access
legal
education
special
programs
law
students
admissible
traditional
criteria
tol
rev
whatever
techniques
law
school
must
make
choices
neither
party
challenged
validity
average
employed
admissions
tool
therefore
consideration
possible
deficiencies
presented
issue
law
school
presented
evidence
show
adjustments
process
employed
used
order
validly
compare
applicants
different
races
instead
chose
avoid
making
comparisons
finally
although
committee
consider
information
files
applicants
law
school
made
effort
show
additional
factors
admitted
minority
applicants
otherwise
rejected
contrary
school
appears
conceded
assessment
taking
factors
account
admitted
minority
applicants
rejected
white
choice
evaluate
law
school
case
made
iii
equal
protection
clause
enact
requirement
law
schools
employ
sole
criterion
admissions
formula
based
upon
lsat
undergraduate
grades
prohibit
law
schools
evaluating
applicant
prior
achievements
light
barriers
overcome
black
applicant
pulled
ghetto
junior
college
may
thereby
demonstrate
level
motivation
perseverance
ability
lead
fairminded
admissions
committee
conclude
shows
promise
law
study
son
rich
alumnus
achieved
better
grades
harvard
applicant
offered
admission
black
individual
shown
potential
harvard
man
may
taken
less
advantage
vastly
superior
opportunities
offered
weight
prior
handicaps
black
applicant
may
realize
full
potential
first
year
law
school
even
full
three
years
long
pull
legal
career
achievements
may
far
outstrip
classmates
whose
earlier
records
appeared
superior
conventional
criteria
currently
test
available
admissions
committee
predict
possibilities
assurance
committee
may
nevertheless
seek
gauge
best
weigh
factor
decisions
policy
limited
blacks
chicanos
filipinos
american
indians
although
undoubtedly
groups
may
practice
principal
beneficiaries
poor
appalachian
white
second
generation
chinese
san
francisco
american
whose
lineage
diverse
defy
ethnic
labels
may
demonstrate
similar
potential
thus
accorded
favorable
consideration
committee
difference
policy
one
presented
case
committee
making
decisions
basis
individual
attributes
rather
according
preference
solely
basis
race
sure
racial
preference
absolute
committee
admit
applicants
four
favored
groups
accord
applicants
preference
applying
extent
precisely
ascertainable
record
different
standards
judge
applications
result
committee
admitted
minority
applicants
school
judgment
less
promising
applicants
rejected
furthermore
apparent
admissions
committee
compared
minority
applicants
one
another
necessary
reserve
proportion
class
even
outset
precise
number
places
set
aside
proportion
apparently
chosen
school
determined
reasonable
although
explanation
provided
number
rather
found
appropriate
without
becoming
embroiled
semantic
debate
whether
practice
constitutes
quota
clear
given
limitation
total
number
applicants
accepted
policy
reduce
total
number
places
defunis
compete
solely
account
race
thus
washington
concluded
whatever
label
one
wishes
apply
minority
admissions
policy
certainly
benign
respect
nonminority
students
displaced
finding
state
school
employed
racial
classification
selecting
students
subjects
strictest
scrutiny
equal
protection
clause
consideration
race
measure
applicant
qualification
normally
introduces
capricious
irrelevant
factor
working
invidious
discrimination
anderson
martin
loving
virginia
harper
virginia
board
elections
race
starting
point
educators
courts
immediately
embroiled
competing
claims
different
racial
ethnic
groups
make
difficult
manageable
standards
consistent
equal
protection
clause
clear
central
purpose
fourteenth
amendment
eliminate
official
state
sources
invidious
racial
discrimination
loving
supra
law
school
admissions
policy
reconciled
purpose
unless
cultural
standards
diverse
rather
homogeneous
society
taken
account
reason
professional
persons
particularly
lawyers
selected
life
computerized
society
indian
walks
beat
chief
seattle
muckleshoot
tribe
washington
different
culture
examiners
law
schools
key
problem
consideration
application
racially
neutral
way
since
lsat
reflects
questions
touching
cultural
backgrounds
admissions
committee
acted
properly
view
setting
minority
applications
apart
separate
processing
minorities
cultural
backgrounds
vastly
different
dominant
caucasian
many
eskimos
american
indians
filipinos
chicanos
asian
indians
burmese
africans
come
disparate
backgrounds
test
sensitively
tuned
applicants
wide
mark
many
minorities
melting
pot
designed
homogenize
people
making
uniform
consistency
melting
pot
understand
figure
speech
depicts
wide
diversities
tolerated
first
amendment
one
flag
see
morison
commager
growth
american
republic
viii
ed
minorities
midst
serve
actively
public
affairs
chosen
talent
character
alone
cultural
orientation
leanings
know
coming
indian
country
washington
many
young
indians
know
little
adam
smith
karl
marx
deeply
imbued
spirit
philosophy
chief
robert
jim
yakimas
chief
seattle
muckleshoots
chief
joseph
nez
perce
offer
competitive
attitudes
towards
life
fellow
man
nature
know
extent
blacks
country
imbued
ideas
african
socialism
leopold
senghor
sekou
toure
articulate
african
leaders
held
modern
african
political
philosophy
oriented
either
marxism
capitalism
far
reintroduction
educational
curricula
ancient
african
art
history
reached
minds
young
know
least
respects
indians
blacks
chicanos
well
asian
cultures
think
separate
classification
applicants
warranted
lest
race
subtle
force
eliminating
minority
members
cultural
differences
insofar
lsat
reflect
dimensions
orientation
organization
man
disservice
minorities
personally
know
admissions
tests
used
eliminate
jews
many
minorities
aim
know
reaction
presence
lsat
sufficient
warrant
school
put
racial
minorities
separate
class
order
better
probe
capacities
potentials
merits
present
controversy
view
resolved
record
trial
involve
disclosure
hidden
prejudices
certain
minorities
manner
substitute
measurements
one
talents
character
employed
conventional
tests
agree
majority
washington
record
said
law
school
selection
racially
neutral
case
view
remanded
new
trial
consider
inter
alia
whether
established
lsat
eliminated
far
racial
minorities
concerned
mean
separate
lsat
must
designed
minority
racial
groups
although
might
possibility
reason
separate
treatment
minorities
class
make
certain
racial
factors
militate
applicant
behalf
constitutional
right
race
preferred
years
slavery
retard
progress
blacks
even
greater
wrong
done
whites
creating
arrogance
instead
humility
encouraging
growth
fiction
superior
race
superior
person
constitutional
standards
defunis
white
entitled
advantage
reason
fact
subject
disability
matter
race
color
whatever
race
constitutional
right
application
considered
individual
merits
racially
neutral
manner
slate
entirely
clean
first
held
pro
rata
representation
races
required
either
juries
see
cassell
texas
public
schools
swann
board
education
moreover
hughes
superior
reviewed
contempt
convictions
pickets
sought
demonstration
force
employer
prefer
negroes
whites
hiring
clerks
order
ensure
employees
negro
finding
california
constitutionally
enjoin
picketing
involved
quoted
opinion
california
noted
pickets
make
right
work
lucky
dependent
fitness
work
equal
right
regardless
race
compete
open
market
rather
membership
particular
race
petitioners
upheld
demand
races
white
yellow
brown
red
equal
rights
demand
discriminatory
hiring
racial
basis
noted
deny
california
right
ban
picketing
circumstances
case
mean
prohibition
pressure
picketing
secure
proportional
employment
ancestral
grounds
hungarians
cleveland
poles
buffalo
germans
milwaukee
portuguese
new
bedford
mexicans
san
antonio
numerous
minority
groups
new
york
whole
gamut
racial
religious
concentrations
various
cities
obviously
problem
solved
next
year
law
school
included
japanese
chinese
norwegians
swedes
poles
italians
puerto
ricans
hungarians
groups
form
diverse
nation
complaints
key
problem
consideration
applications
racially
neutral
way
abolition
lsat
start
invention
substitute
tests
might
made
get
measure
applicant
cultural
background
perception
ability
analyze
relation
groups
highly
subjective
unlike
lsat
concealed
open
law
school
bound
legal
principle
admit
students
mechanical
criteria
insensitive
potential
applicant
may
realized
hospitable
environment
necessary
approach
put
effort
assessing
individual
required
lsat
scores
undergraduate
grades
dominate
selection
process
interviews
applicant
others
know
test
schools
currently
run
summer
programs
potential
students
likely
bypassed
conventional
admissions
criteria
given
opportunity
try
hand
law
courses
certainly
performance
programs
weighed
heavily
moreover
bar
considering
individual
prior
achievements
light
racial
discrimination
barred
way
factor
attempting
assess
true
potential
successful
legal
career
bar
considering
individual
basis
rather
according
racial
classifications
likelihood
particular
candidate
likely
employ
legal
skills
service
communities
adequately
represented
competing
candidates
every
student
benefited
expanded
admissions
program
fall
one
four
racial
groups
involved
drawback
deserving
applicants
also
get
opportunity
otherwise
denied
certainly
program
substantially
fulfill
law
school
interest
giving
diverse
group
access
legal
profession
program
might
less
convenient
administratively
simply
sorting
students
race
never
held
administrative
convenience
justify
racial
discrimination
argument
compelling
state
interest
easily
justify
racial
discrimination
practiced
many
compelling
give
members
one
race
even
pro
rata
representation
public
payrolls
might
deluged
say
chicanos
group
poorest
poor
need
work
others
leaving
desperately
poor
individual
blacks
whites
without
employment
token
large
quotas
blacks
browns
added
bar
waiving
examinations
required
groups
better
racially
balanced
state
however
may
proceed
racial
classification
force
strict
population
equivalencies
every
group
every
occupation
overriding
individual
preferences
equal
protection
clause
commands
elimination
racial
barriers
creation
order
satisfy
theory
society
organized
purpose
university
washington
produce
black
lawyers
blacks
polish
lawyers
poles
jewish
lawyers
jews
irish
lawyers
irish
produce
good
lawyers
americans
place
first
amendment
barriers
anyone
point
heart
school
desegregation
cases
brown
board
education
swann
board
education
segregated
admissions
process
creates
suggestions
stigma
caste
less
segregated
classroom
end
may
produce
result
despite
contrary
intentions
one
assumption
must
clearly
disapproved
blacks
browns
make
individual
merit
stamp
inferiority
state
permitted
place
lawyer
discrimination
based
race
constitutionally
permissible
hold
reins
come
compelling
reasons
justify
constitutional
guarantees
acquire
quality
speech
closely
brigaded
action
triggers
fight
chaplinsky
new
hampshire
shouting
fire
crowded
theater
triggers
riot
may
well
racial
strains
racial
susceptibility
certain
diseases
racial
sensitiveness
environmental
conditions
races
experience
may
extreme
situation
justify
differences
racial
treatment
fairminded
person
call
invidious
discrimination
mental
ability
category
races
compete
fairly
professional
levels
far
race
concerned
preference
one
race
another
competition
view
invidious
violative
equal
protection
clause
problem
tendered
case
important
crucial
operation
constitutional
system
educators
must
given
leeway
may
well
whole
congeries
applicants
marginal
group
defy
known
methods
selection
conceivably
admissions
committee
might
conclude
selection
lot
say
last
seats
fair
solution
courts
educators
expertise
limited
task
ends
inquiry
whether
judged
main
purpose
equal
protection
clause
protection
racial
discrimination
invidious
discrimination
different
case
suit
one
displace
applicant
chosen
lieu
defunis
record
show
concerning
potentials
considered
weighed
educational
decision
provided
proper
guidelines
used
reflect
expertise
courts
honor
problem
tendered
physical
facilities
apparently
adequate
take
defunis
addition
others
view
say
tests
used
applied
invidiously
discriminated
race
conclude
admissions
procedure
law
school
university
washington
excluded
defunis
violative
equal
protection
clause
fourteenth
amendment
judgment
washington
vacated
case
remanded
new
trial
appendix
opinion
douglas
dissenting
admissions
objectives
admissions
program
select
admit
applicants
best
prospect
high
quality
academic
work
law
school
minority
admissions
program
described
objective
stated
measuring
academic
potential
law
school
relies
primarily
undergraduate
average
performance
law
school
admission
test
lsat
weighting
two
indicators
determined
statistically
reference
past
experience
school
applicants
resulting
applicant
ranking
nearly
accurate
available
measures
relative
academic
potential
truly
exceptional
cases
numerical
indicators
clearly
appear
inaccurate
measure
academic
potential
admission
decision
indicated
alone
may
altered
consideration
factors
listed
number
truly
exceptional
cases
particular
year
fall
somewhere
zero
approximately
forty
factors
used
however
aid
assessing
applicant
academic
potential
totality
without
undue
emphasis
reliance
upon
one
without
attempt
quantify
advance
strength
application
singly
whole
particular
case
difficulty
ease
undergraduate
curriculum
track
pursued
demanding
quality
undergraduate
school
department
attainment
advanced
degree
nature
thereof
difficulty
ease
attainment
applicant
pursuits
subsequent
attainment
undergraduate
degree
degree
success
therein
bearing
applicant
academic
potential
possibility
applicant
many
years
away
academic
work
may
less
well
lsat
counterpart
presently
recently
academic
work
substantial
change
mental
physical
health
indicates
prospect
either
higher
lower
quality
academic
work
substantial
change
economic
pressures
circumstances
indicates
prospect
either
higher
lower
quality
academic
work
exceptionally
good
bad
performance
upon
writing
test
ingredient
lsat
current
year
weighting
numerical
indicators
otherwise
take
writing
score
account
quality
strength
recommendations
bearing
upon
applicant
academic
potential
objective
indicators
motivation
succeed
academic
study
law
variations
level
academic
achievement
time
indicators
serve
objective
stated
certain
ethnic
groups
society
historically
limited
access
legal
profession
resulting
underrepresentation
affect
quality
legal
services
available
members
groups
well
limit
opportunity
full
participation
governance
communities
faculty
recognizes
special
obligation
admissions
policy
contribute
solution
problem
qualified
minority
applicants
therefore
admitted
minority
admissions
program
number
entering
class
reasonable
proportion
minority
persons
view
obligation
stated
overall
objective
law
school
provide
legal
education
qualified
persons
generally
purpose
determining
number
specially
admitted
program
ceiling
minority
admissions
generally
faculty
currently
believes
approximately
percent
reasonable
proportion
sufficient
qualified
applicants
available
minority
admissions
program
admission
offered
applicants
reasonable
prospect
academic
success
law
school
determined
case
considering
numerical
indicators
along
listed
factors
section
without
regard
restriction
upon
number
contained
section
particular
internal
percentage
proportion
among
various
minority
groups
entering
class
specified
rather
law
school
strives
reasonable
internal
balance
given
particular
makeup
year
applicant
population
ethnic
groups
within
scope
minority
admissions
program
may
appropriate
give
preference
degree
residents
state
determination
made
year
view
particulars
year
situation
preference
given
necessary
meet
substantial
local
need
minority
representation
grades
calculated
conventional
scale
lsat
scored
scale
ranging
writing
test
given
day
lsat
administered
also
included
formula
scored
scale
admissions
committee
combines
scores
average
calculating
sum
average
lsat
score
writing
test
score
app
brief
discussion
use
lsat
combination
undergraduate
grades
predict
law
school
success
see
comments
study
criteria
legal
education
admission
bar
article
thomas
goolsby
legal
ed
substantial
group
admitted
point
military
applicants
students
previously
admitted
school
either
unable
come
forced
leave
tenure
draft
given
preferential
treatment
upon
reapplication
completing
military
obligation
since
neither
party
raised
issue
concerning
group
applicants
remaining
consideration
admissions
procedure
discuss
four
minority
applicants
also
admitted
time
although
none
apparently
scores
app
admission
presumably
pursuant
procedure
minority
applicants
described
council
legal
education
opportunities
program
federally
funded
office
economic
opportunity
sponsored
american
bar
association
association
american
law
schools
national
bar
association
law
school
admissions
council
testimony
chairman
admissions
committee
statement
facts
guide
applicants
explained
gauged
potential
outstanding
performance
law
school
existence
high
test
scores
grade
point
averages
also
careful
analysis
recommendations
quality
work
difficult
analytical
seminars
courses
writing
programs
academic
standards
school
attended
applicant
applicant
graduate
work
nature
applicant
employment
since
graduation
applicant
ability
make
significant
contributions
law
school
classes
community
large
assessed
factors
extracurricular
community
activities
employment
general
background
gave
preference
discriminate
either
washington
residents
women
making
determinations
applicant
racial
ethnic
background
considered
one
factor
general
attempt
convert
formal
credentials
realistic
predictions
respondents
provided
following
table
response
interrogatory
proceedings
state
predicted
number
number
first
year
averages
applications
received
accepted
app
although
apparently
evidence
point
record
respondents
suggest
least
eight
students
also
admitted
preferential
basis
brief
respondents
bureau
census
census
population
general
population
characteristics
washington
final
report
pc
table
history
gradual
acceptance
among
law
schools
standardized
tests
admission
tool
see
ramsey
law
school
admissions
science
art
hunch
legal
ed
survey
use
lsat
american
law
schools
see
lunneborg
radford
lsat
survey
actual
practice
legal
ed
rock
motivation
moderators
test
bias
tol
rev
outset
committee
may
chosen
range
precise
number
determined
later
process
total
number
minority
applicants
tentative
assessment
quality
determined
appears
current
articulated
policy
see
app
opinion
advised
respondents
represents
formal
statement
policy
effect
represent
change
policy
letter
dated
march
fact
committee
set
precise
number
advance
obviously
irrelevant
legal
analysis
matter
minimal
level
achievement
committee
reach
order
achieve
stated
goal
proportion
class
reserved
minority
groups
long
committee
willing
order
achieve
goal
admit
minority
applicants
committee
judgment
less
qualified
rejected
applicants
otherwise
admitted
see
supra
app
opinion
uncommon
controversy
report
prepared
american
friends
service
committee
see
fee
chief
joseph
biography
great
indian
see
brockway
african
socialism
african
socialism
friedland
rosberg
ed
see
senghor
african
socialism
cook
ed
faced
situation
barriers
overtly
covertly
put
path
members
one
racial
group
required
others
also
showing
purpose
school
policy
eliminate
arbitrary
irrelevant
barriers
entry
certain
racial
groups
legal
profession
groups
griggs
duke
power
swann
board
education
stated
matter
educational
policy
school
authorities
within
broad
discretion
specify
school
within
district
prescribed
ratio
negro
white
students
reflecting
proportion
district
whole
order
disestablish
dual
school
system
crucial
difference
policy
suggested
swann
consideration
swann
policy
impinge
person
constitutional
rights
one
excluded
public
school
one
right
attend
segregated
public
school
sweatt
held
state
justify
denying
black
admission
regular
law
school
creating
new
law
school
blacks
held
new
law
school
meet
requirements
equality
set
forth
plessy
ferguson
student
said
entitled
legal
education
equivalent
offered
state
students
races
education
available
separate
law
school
offered
state
cases
involved
exercise
war
power
great
leveler
rights
navy
sunk
pearl
harbor
one
knew
japanese
fleet
advised
oral
argument
japanese
landed
troops
west
coast
nothing
stop
west
rockies
military
judgment
aid
prospective
defense
west
coast
enclaves
americans
japanese
ancestry
moved
inland
lest
invaders
donning
civilian
clothes
wreak
even
serious
havoc
western
ports
decisions
extreme
went
verge
wartime
power
severely
criticized
however
easy
retrospect
denounce
done
actually
attempted
japanese
invasion
country
joint
chiefs
staff
worrying
japanese
soldiers
landing
west
coast
actually
landing
burma
kota
bharu
malaya
making
plans
defense
nation
knowledge
planning
worst
moreover
day
decided
korematsu
also
decided
ex
parte
endo
holding
evacuation
americans
japanese
ancestry
allowable
extreme
war
conditions
detention
evacuation
said
citizen
concededly
loyal
presents
problem
espionage
sabotage
loyalty
matter
heart
mind
race
creed
color
loyal
definition
spy
saboteur
power
detain
derived
power
protect
war
effort
espionage
sabotage
detention
relationship
objective
unauthorized
see
supra
johnson
committee
examinations
denied
certiorari
case
presenting
similar
issue
petitioner
claimed
bar
examiners
reconsidered
papers
submitted
failing
minority
applicants
whose
scores
close
cutoff
point
result
minority
applicants
admitted
bar
although
initially
examination
scores
lower
white
applicants
failed
arizona
denied
johnson
admission
summarily
original
proceeding
judicial
findings
either
sustaining
rejecting
factual
claims
racial
bias
putting
case
awkward
posture
review
johnson
subsequently
brought
civil
rights
action
federal
district
seeking
damages
injunctive
relief
district
dismissed
action
appeals
affirmed
holding
lower
federal
courts
jurisdiction
review
decisions
arizona
admissions
state
bar
johnson
sought
review
denied
motion
leave
file
petition
mandamus
prohibition
certiorari
february
johnson
wilmer
thus
entire
history
case
ever
actually
sustained
johnson
factual
contentions
concerning
racial
bias
bar
examiners
procedures
defunis
thus
appears
first
case
squarely
presenting
problem
underlying
cultural
background
tests
potential
ideological
issues
plagued
bar
associations
courts
summers
involved
denial
practice
law
man
conscientiously
bear
arms
vote
five
four
konigsberg
state
bar
followed
remand
konigsberg
state
bar
resulted
barring
one
admission
state
bar
refusal
answer
questions
concerning
communist
party
membership
excluded
five
four
petitioner
schware
board
bar
examiners
however
admitted
practice
even
though
years
earlier
member
communist
party
anastaplo
decision
barred
man
admission
state
bar
invoked
fifth
amendment
asked
membership
communist
party
asserted
first
fourteenth
amendments
protected
inquiry
baird
state
bar
arizona
held
divided
vote
person
kept
state
bar
refusing
answer
whether
ever
member
communist
party
see
stolar
see
slaughter
house
cases
wall
justice
brennan
justice
douglas
justice
white
justice
marshall
concur
dissenting
respectfully
dissent
many
weeks
school
term
remain
petitioner
may
receive
degree
despite
respondents
assurances
petitioner
allowed
complete
term
schooling
regardless
decision
number
unexpected
events
illness
economic
necessity
even
academic
failure
might
prevent
graduation
end
term
misfortune
befall
petitioner
required
register
yet
another
term
prospect
face
hurdle
admissions
policy
real
fanciful
respondents
warn
defunis
take
appropriate
action
request
continued
admission
remainder
law
school
education
discretionary
action
university
request
taken
respondents
memorandum
question
mootness
emphasis
supplied
thus
respondents
assurances
dissipated
possibility
petitioner
might
run
gantlet
university
allegedly
unlawful
admissions
policy
therefore
proceeds
erroneous
premise
resting
mootness
holding
supposed
inability
render
judgment
may
affect
one
way
petitioner
completion
law
studies
surely
reverse
washington
insure
reason
petitioner
graduate
spring
entitled
later
time
basis
others
faced
hurdle
university
allegedly
unlawful
admissions
policy
circumstances
university
position
implies
concession
admissions
policy
unlawful
controversy
falls
squarely
within
long
line
decisions
holding
ere
voluntary
cessation
allegedly
illegal
conduct
moot
case
phosphate
export
see
gray
sanders
grant
walling
helmerich
payne
ftc
goodyear
tire
rubber
freight
since
respondents
voluntary
representation
permit
petitioner
complete
term
studies
respondents
borne
heavy
burden
phosphate
export
supra
demonstrating
even
mere
possibility
petitioner
subject
challenged
admissions
policy
grant
supra
contrary
respondents
positioned
free
return
old
ways
thus
find
justification
straining
rid
dispute
must
vigilant
require
litigants
maintain
personal
stake
outcome
controversy
assure
questions
framed
necessary
specificity
issues
contested
necessary
adverseness
litigation
pursued
necessary
vigor
assure
constitutional
challenge
made
form
traditionally
thought
capable
judicial
resolution
flast
cohen
want
adversary
contest
case
indeed
concedes
petitioner
lost
stake
controversy
registered
spring
term
petitioner
took
action
case
fully
litigated
state
courts
briefs
filed
oral
argument
heard
case
thus
ripe
decision
fully
developed
factual
record
sharply
defined
fully
canvassed
legal
issues
cf
sibron
new
york
moreover
endeavoring
dispose
case
moot
clearly
disserves
public
interest
constitutional
issues
avoided
today
concern
vast
numbers
people
organizations
colleges
universities
evidenced
filing
amicus
curiae
briefs
constitutional
questions
recent
history
stirred
much
debate
disappear
must
inevitably
return
federal
courts
ultimately
cf
richardson
wright
dissenting
opinion
avoidance
repetitious
litigation
serves
public
interest
inevitability
counsels
mootness
determinations
compelled
record
cf
grant
supra
parker
ellis
dissenting
opinion
although
course
avoid
unnecessary
decisions
constitutional
questions
transform
principles
avoidance
constitutional
decisions
devices
sidestepping
resolution
difficult
cases
cf
cohens
virginia
wheat
marshall
appears
case
find
extant
controversy
decide
merits
important
constitutional
questions
presented