In Bakke v Regents of the University of California, Alan Bakke, who had applied to the University and been rejected, sued the Regents claiming that his civil rights as a white had been denied by the University's policy of affirmative action for non--white applicants. Affirmative action, he argued, violated the Civil RIghts Act of 1964, which forbids racial discrimination by the federal government or any program (such as a state university) that receives federal funding. The Supreme Court held that affirmative action was constitutionally allowed so long as race was only one of several factors taken into account by admissions officers, but that strict quotas that could apply regardless of qualifications violated the law.
Regents of the University of California v. Bakke (1978)
Allan Bakke claimed he was a victim of reverse discrimination.
Regents of University of California v. Bakke
Regents of the University of California vs Bakke affirmed affirmative action by ruling it as entirely constitutional. This allowed for affirmative action programs to have a clear set of laws and regulations regarding their behavior and rights.
Regents of the University of California v. Bakke
Bakke won, he was accepted into the school.
In Bakke v Regents of the University of California, Alan Bakke, who had applied to the University and been rejected, sued the Regents claiming that his civil rights as a white had been denied by the University's policy of affirmative action for non--white applicants. Affirmative action, he argued, violated the Civil RIghts Act of 1964, which forbids racial discrimination by the federal government or any program (such as a state university) that receives federal funding. The Supreme Court held that affirmative action was constitutionally allowed so long as race was only one of several factors taken into account by admissions officers, but that strict quotas that could apply regardless of qualifications violated the law.
University of California v. Bakke
The court ruled that the use of racial quotas in college admissions was unconstitutional.
In Regents of the University of California v. Bakke (1978), the defendant, the University of California, argued that its affirmative action program was necessary to promote diversity within the student body and to remedy past discrimination against minority groups. They contended that the program aimed to create a more equitable educational environment and prepare students for a multicultural society. The university maintained that its admissions policies were designed to achieve these goals without outright quotas, which they claimed were not the sole basis for admissions decisions.
The Bakke case, formally known as Regents of the University of California v. Bakke (1978), was a landmark Supreme Court decision addressing affirmative action in higher education. Allan Bakke, a white applicant, challenged the University of California, Davis Medical School's admissions policy, which set aside a certain number of seats for minority applicants. The Court ruled that while affirmative action programs aimed at increasing diversity are permissible, racial quotas are unconstitutional. This decision set a precedent for how schools could consider race in admissions without implementing strict quotas.
Allan Bakke was the plaintiff in the famous "reverse discrimination" lawsuit again the University of California at Davis medical school. The case went to the US Supreme Court which found the medical school admission process discriminated against Bakke, and also found that strict quotas were an unlawful way to increase diversity.Case Citation:Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, 438 U.S. 265 (1978)