REGENTS OF The UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, Petitioner, V. Allan... ~ Daily News

Wednesday, April 28, 2021

REGENTS OF The UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, Petitioner, V. Allan...

The essence of the decision in Regents of the University of California v. Bakke was that the Court upheld affirmative action. It allowed race to be considered as one of several factors in college admission policy. But establishing specific racial quotas was an approach that the Court said was not allowable.Source for information on Regents of the University of California v. Bakke: The Columbia Encyclopedia, 6th ed. dictionary. Bakke had twice been rejected by the medical school, even though he had a higher grade point average than a number of minority candidates who were admitted.Bakke filed suit, arguing that the university's quota system for minority students violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The United States Supreme Court took up the case of Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, 438...Allan Bakke, a thirty-five-year-old white man, had twice applied for admission to the University of California Medical School at Davis. There was no single majority opinion. Four of the justices contended that any racial quota system supported by government violated the Civil Rights Act of 1964.The California Supreme Court ordered the school, the State-run University of California, to admit Bakke. Allan Bakke filed suit after learning that minority candidates with lower qualifications had been admitted to medical school under a program that reserved spaces for ?disadvantaged? applicants.

Regents of the University of California v. Bakke | Encyclopedia.com

A list of BBC episodes and clips related to "Regents of the University of California v. Bakke".Did the University of California violate the Fourteenth Amendment's equal protection clause, and the Civil Rights Act of 1964? The Court affirmed the holding that the University's special admissions program was unlawful and the order that the respondent, Bakke, be admitted to the medical school.Key Question: Did the University of California violate the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause, and the Civil Rights Act of 1964, by practicing an affirmative action policy that resulted in the repeated rejection of Bakke's application for admission to its medical school?Find out information about Regents of the University of California v. Bakke. case decided in 1978 by the U.S. Supreme Court. Bakke had twice been rejected by the medical school, even though he had a higher grade point average than a number of minority candidates who were admitted.

You can quote SCOTUS on quotas (Regents of the University of...)

Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, 438 U.S. 265 (1978), was a landmark decision by the Supreme Court of the United States. It upheld affirmative action, allowing race to be one of several factors in college admission policy.This time Bakke sued the University of California. His position was that the school had excluded him on the basis of his race and violated his rights The trial court ruled in Bakkes favor, however they did not order the University of California to admit him. Bakke appealed to the California Supreme...The University of California, Davis Medical School reserved 16 spots out of the 100 in any given class for "disadvantaged minorities." It is important to note that in Bakke, the Court did not technically hold the special admissions program unconstitutional. J. Stevens and the three other Justices joining...The Background of Regents of the University of California v. Bakke (1978). Bakke had discovered upon researching the application of individuals who had been accepted and classified with 'minority statuses' on their respective applications, that his scores were higher.Allan Bakke, a white male, was denied admission to the University of California Medical School. Following his second denial Bakke challenged the constitutionality of the Medical School's special admissions program claiming the program created a racial barrier to enrolment in a publicly funded...

Law School Case Brief

Rule:

In view of the clear legislative intent, Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C.S. § 2000d, must be held to proscribe only those racial classifications that will violate the Equal Protection Clause or the U.S. Const. amend. V.

Facts:

A white male who have been denied admission to the scientific school at the University of California at Davis for two consecutive years, instituted an action for declaratory and injunctive aid towards the Regents of the University in the Superior Court of Yolo County, California, alleging the invalidity--under the equal coverage clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, a provision of the California Constitution, and the proscription in Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (forty two USCS 2000d et seq.) in opposition to racial discrimination in any program receiving federal monetary assistance--of the scientific college's special admissions program beneath which best disadvantaged individuals of positive minority races were considered for 16 of the 100 places in every 12 months's class.

Issue:

Did the University of California violate the Fourteenth Amendment's equal coverage clause, and the Civil Rights Act of 1964?

Answer:

Yes.

Conclusion:

The Court affirmed the keeping that the University's particular admissions program was illegal and the order that the respondent, Bakke, be admitted to the scientific school. The Court reversed that part of the judgment enjoining the University from any attention of race in its admissions process. Race may well be thought to be in admissions if it was factored in with other characteristics in a competitive process.

Access the complete text case Not a Lexis+ subscriber? Try it out without cost. Be Sure You're Prepared for Class