How the Courts Address or Respect Our Rights as Citizens

Gratz v. Bollinger was a United States Supreme Court decision on the University of
Michigan’s admission policy. The United States Supreme Court held that discrimination is
against the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Implementing a policy that
favors any race is therefore unconstitutional (Bollinger, 2003 p. 1588). The bonus points that
were issued to individuals from minority races created discrimination, and this violated the tenets
of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution as well as Title VI of the Civil
Rights Act of 1964.

Case Outline

Facts of the Case
The case revolved around the University of Michigan’s admission policy. The university
relied on a 150-point scale in admitting individuals who had applied for various programs in the
institution. For an applicant to qualify to join the institution, they needed to score at least a
hundred points (Robinson, Franklin, & Epermanis, 2007 p. 33). The university adopted an
affirmative action policy that aimed to boost the admission numbers for individuals from
underprivileged races by giving the individuals a 20-point bonus that counted towards the 100-
point requirement. Minority groups, including African-Americans, Hispanics, and Native
Americans qualified for the 20-point bonus (Robinson, Franklin, & Epermanis, 2007 p. 36). The
petitioners in the case were Jennifer Gratz and Patrick Hamacher. The two were Caucasian and
had made an application to be admitted to the College of Literature, Science, and Arts. Gratz had
made her application in 1995, while Hamacher had made her application in 1997. Gratz and

Hamacher were both under the qualified range but were denied early admission and subsequently
denied admission at the University of Michigan. The Center for Individual Rights then filed a
case on behalf of the petitioners. The petition alleged that the university had a policy whose
effect was to create a racial preference in the selection process.
History of the Case
The case was filed in October 1997 in the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Michigan. The case respondents were the University of Michigan, the College of
Literature Science and Arts, the president of the University James Dederstadt and Lee Bollinger.
James was the president of the University when Gratz was making her application, while Lee
was president when Hamacher made his application (Robinson, Franklin, & Epermanis, 2007 p.
45). At the District Court, the court held that the university’s policy amounted to ‘holding seats’
for the members of minority races. The case was escalated to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the
Sixth Circuit. The appellate court upheld the university’s admission policy, and the result was
that the petitioners asked to be heard at the Supreme Court. The petitioners also sought certiorari.
Legal Questions
The primary legal question in the case was whether or not the University of Michigan’s
undergraduate admission policy that created racial preferences violated the Equal Protection
Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment (Greenberg & Page, 2018 p.72).
Decisions or Holdings
The Supreme Court held that the University of Michigan’s admission policy was
unconstitutional and a violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment as
well as Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The court held that the policy to make race a

decisive factor in the admission process violated the rights of the applicants against
discrimination.
Verdict and Opinion
The court reached a 6-3 opinion in 2003. The majority opinion was that the distribution
of automatic points to every applicant from underrepresented races failed to be tailored to factor
in race and failed to fit into the category of individualized consideration as set out in Regents of
the University v. Bakke. Justice William Rehnquist delivered the judgment on behalf of the
majority. Justice William stated that each applicant had to be considered as an individual and
their qualities and contributions considered in the admission process. Awarding every member
from minority group 20 points fails to achieve individualized consideration, and this makes it
violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment (Robinson, Franklin, &
Epermanis, 2007 p.49). The minority dissented from this opinion and stated that problems
associated with racial oppression were still part of society. Colleges and universities can thus be
expected to implement policies that seek to accommodate racial minorities.

Conclusion

The case raised various weighty matters on issues that have to do with race. The Equal
Amendments Clause in the Fourteenth Amendment gives all citizens of the United States the
same rights. The University of Michigan’s affirmative action policy that awarded 20
predetermined points to every applicant drawn from the minority groups was thus discriminatory
and against Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The court delivered a landmark ruling that
aimed to ensure that the rights of applicants are respected in the admission process.

References

Bollinger, L. C. (2003). A comment on Grutter and Gratz v. Bollinger. Columbia Law
Review, 103(6), 1588-1595.
Robinson, R. K., Franklin, G. M., & Epermanis, K. (2007). The supreme court rulings in grutter
v. bollinger and gratz v. bollinger: The brave new world of affirmative action in the 21st
century. Public Personnel Management, 36(1), 33-49.
Greenberg, E. S., & Page, B. I. (2018). The Struggle for Democracy: 2018 Elections and
Updates Edition (p. 720). Pearson Education US, Incorporated.