67 (1): 1–13. She applied to a nearby law school, the University of Michigan Law School, with the hopes of becoming a health care attorney. Justices,The decision largely upheld the Court's decision in,The University argued that there was a compelling state interest to ensure a "critical mass" of students from minority groups, particularly African Americans and Hispanics, which is realized within the student body.

Much of the dissent concerned a disbelief in the validity of the law school's claim that the system was necessary to create a "critical mass" of minority students and provide a diverse educational environment.Chief Justice Rehnquist, joined by Justice Scalia, Justice Kennedy, and Justice Thomas, argued the Law School's admissions policy was an attempt to achieve an unconstitutional type of racial balancing. 9 Argued April 1, 2003. They argued that this aims to "ensure that these minority students do not feel isolated or like spokespersons for their race; to provide adequate opportunities for the type of interaction upon which the educational benefits of diversity depend; and to challenge all students to think critically and re-examine stereotypes.

Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 US 306 - Supreme Court 2003 - Google Scholar v. United States, (PDF). certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the sixth circuit No.

Grutter v. Bollinger presented the question, in the words of Associate Justice Sandra Day O‟Connor of “whether the use of race as a factor in student admissions by the University of Michigan Law School . Moreover, Justice Thomas noted that in,Another criticism raised by Justice Thomas compared Michigan Law to the.A final criticism leveled at Justice O'Connor's opinion was the length of time the racial admissions policy will be lawful.

This admissions program automatically awarded 20 points out of the 100 necessary for … Judges R. Guy Cole Jr. and Martha Craig Daughtrey said that "Proposal 2 reorders the political process in Michigan to place special burdens on minority interests."

CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT No. Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 306 (2003), was a landmark case of the Supreme Court of the United States concerning affirmative action in student admissions.The Court held that a student admissions process that favors "underrepresented minority groups" does not violate the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause so long as it takes into account other factors … 73 The Legal & Regulatory Environment of Business.Past Presidents of the University of Michigan;Regents of the University of California v. Bakke,University of California, Berkeley School of Law,Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action,List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 539,Affirmative action at the University of Michigan,"Past Presidents | Office of the President","Appeals court strikes down Michigan's affirmative action ban",Briefs, Decisions and audio recordings (mp3 & realmedia),College of Literature, Science, and the Arts,School of Natural Resources and Environment,Taubman College of Architecture and Urban Planning,Michigan–Michigan State basketball rivalry,Michigan–Michigan State ice hockey rivalry,University of Michigan Museum of Natural History,Engineering Research Center for Wireless Integrated Microsystems,University of Michigan Consumer Sentiment Index,Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964,https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Grutter_v._Bollinger&oldid=977815543,United States affirmative action case law,United States Supreme Court cases of the Rehnquist Court,Wikipedia articles in need of updating from June 2020,All Wikipedia articles in need of updating,Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License,Held for Plaintiff and enjoined use of current admissions policy, 137.University of Michigan Law School admissions program that gave special consideration for being a certain racial minority did not violate the Fourteenth Amendment.O'Connor, joined by Stevens, Souter, Ginsburg, Breyer,Rehnquist, joined by Scalia, Kennedy, Thomas. Mun-zel stated there is no number, percentage, or range of numbers or percentages that constitute critical mass.