Gratz v. Bollinger

Gratz v. Bollinger was a landmark United States Supreme Court case that dealt with the issue of affirmative action in University of Michigan admissions, involving Jennifer Gratz and Lee Bollinger, the president of the University of Michigan. The case was decided on June 23, 2003, and it had significant implications for the use of racial preferences in higher education in the United States, as seen in similar cases such as Regents of the University of California v. Bakke and Fisher v. University of Texas. The Supreme Court's decision in this case was influenced by the opinions of Justices Sandra Day O'Connor, Antonin Scalia, and Ruth Bader Ginsburg, as well as the arguments presented by Solicitor General Theodore Olson and American Civil Liberties Union lawyer Laurence Tribe.

Background

The case of Gratz v. Bollinger originated from a lawsuit filed by Jennifer Gratz and Patrick Hamacher against the University of Michigan's College of Literature, Science, and the Arts, alleging that the university's admissions policy, which used a point system to favor African American, Hispanic, and Native American applicants, was unconstitutional and violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The University of Michigan's admissions policy was defended by Lee Bollinger, the president of the university, and Boalt Hall professor Goodwin Liu, who argued that the policy was necessary to achieve a diverse student body and to remedy the effects of historical discrimination against minority groups, as recognized by the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. The case was supported by National Association for the Advancement of Colored People and American Jewish Committee, while it was opposed by Center for Individual Rights and National Review.

Procedural History

The case began in 1997, when Jennifer Gratz and Patrick Hamacher filed a lawsuit against the University of Michigan in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, alleging that the university's admissions policy was discriminatory and unconstitutional, as argued by Judge Avern Cohn and Judge Bernard Friedman. The case was initially dismissed by the district court, but it was later appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, where it was heard by Judge Boyce F. Martin Jr. and Judge Danny Julian Boggs. The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, holding that the university's admissions policy was unconstitutional, and the decision was influenced by the opinions of Judge Alice M. Batchelder and Judge Martha Craig Daughtrey. The University of Michigan then appealed the decision to the United States Supreme Court, which agreed to hear the case, with Justice John Paul Stevens and Justice David Souter playing key roles in the decision.

Opinion of the Court

The Supreme Court's decision in Gratz v. Bollinger was delivered by Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, who held that the University of Michigan's admissions policy was unconstitutional because it used a point system that automatically awarded points to applicants from certain racial groups, as argued by Justice Antonin Scalia and Justice Clarence Thomas. The court ruled that the policy was not narrowly tailored to achieve a compelling interest in diversity, as required by the Equal Protection Clause, and the decision was influenced by the opinions of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Justice Stephen Breyer. However, the court also held that race-conscious admissions policies could be constitutional if they were narrowly tailored to achieve a compelling interest in diversity, as seen in the case of Grutter v. Bollinger, which was decided on the same day and involved Barbara Grutter and Lee Bollinger.

Impact and Aftermath

The decision in Gratz v. Bollinger had significant implications for the use of affirmative action in higher education in the United States, as seen in the cases of Fisher v. University of Texas and Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action. The decision led to changes in the admissions policies of many universities, including the University of Michigan, which replaced its point system with a more holistic approach to admissions, as argued by University of California, Berkeley professor Robert Post and Harvard University professor Lani Guinier. The decision also sparked a national debate about the use of affirmative action in higher education, with some arguing that it was necessary to achieve diversity and remedy historical discrimination, as argued by National Association for the Advancement of Colored People and American Civil Liberties Union, while others argued that it was unconstitutional and unfair, as argued by Center for Individual Rights and National Review.

Legacy

The legacy of Gratz v. Bollinger continues to be felt in the United States today, with the case remaining a landmark decision in the area of affirmative action and equal protection law, as recognized by the American Bar Association and the National Association of Scholars. The case has been cited in numerous other cases, including Fisher v. University of Texas and Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action, and it continues to influence the debate about the use of affirmative action in higher education, with scholars such as Derrick Bell and Lani Guinier arguing that it is necessary to achieve diversity and remedy historical discrimination, while others, such as Ward Connerly and Roger Clegg, argue that it is unconstitutional and unfair. The case has also been the subject of numerous books and articles, including works by University of Michigan professor Patricia Gurin and Harvard University professor Charles Fried. Category:United States Supreme Court cases