Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
The Supreme Court struck down decades of legal precedent that allowed colleges and universities to consider race as a factor in admissions. Supreme Court rules affirmative action 'must end' in ...
Texas (5th Cir. 1996) that the University of Texas School of Law could not use race as a factor in admissions. This was the first successful legal challenge to racial preferences since Bakke . Two cases in 2003 involving the University of Michigan found that the university's policy of granting extra points to minorities for undergraduate ...
With its companion case, Students for Fair Admissions v. University of North Carolina, the Supreme Court effectively overruled Grutter v. Bollinger (2003) [6] and Regents of the University of California v. Bakke (1978), which validated some affirmative action in college admissions provided that race had a limited role in decisions. [b]
The court held that "the University of Texas School of Law may not use race as a factor in deciding which applicants to admit in order to achieve a diverse student body, to combat the perceived effects of a hostile environment at the law school, to alleviate the law school's poor reputation in the minority community, or to eliminate any present ...
Gratz v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 244 (2003), was a United States Supreme Court case regarding the University of Michigan undergraduate affirmative action admissions policy. In a 6–3 decision announced on June 23, 2003, Chief Justice Rehnquist, writing for the Court, ruled the University's point system's "predetermined point allocations" that awarded 20 points towards admission to ...
Bakke applied late to UC Davis in 1973 because his mother-in-law was ill. [23] [24] This delay may well have cost him admission: although his credentials were outstanding even among applicants not part of the special program, by the time that his candidacy was considered under the school's rolling admissions process, there were few seats left. [25]
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" did not violate the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause so long as it took into account other factors evaluated on an individual ...
These differences may be a factor in determining why European Students have been more successful in obtaining legally recognized student rights, from the right to access free education to the right to move and study freely from one EU country to the next, to the right to exercise their national legal rights in institutions of higher education.