Justice Thomas in Grutter V. Bollinger: Can Passion Play a Role in a Jurist's Reasoning?

By Kearney, Mary Kate | St. John's Law Review, Winter 2004 | Go to article overview

Justice Thomas in Grutter V. Bollinger: Can Passion Play a Role in a Jurist's Reasoning?


Kearney, Mary Kate, St. John's Law Review


INTRODUCTION

Among the most widely anticipated decisions of the United States Supreme Court's 2002 Term were the Michigan affirmative action cases. The companion cases involved challenges to the University of Michigan's (the "University") use of race as a factor in admissions at the undergraduate and Law School levels. In Grate v. Bollinger,1 the Court struck down the University's policy at the undergraduate level because "the University's policy, which automatically distribute [d] 20 points, or one-fifth of the points needed to guarantee admission, to every single 'underrepresented minority' applicant solely because of race, [was] not narrowly tailored to achieve [an] interest in educational diversity."2 In Grutier v. Bollinger,3 the Court upheld the University of Michigan Law School's (the "Law School") policy which allowed race to be used as a factor in admissions decisions.4

The Grutter case arose when the Law School rejected the application of Barbara Grutter, a white Michigan resident with an undergraduate grade point average of 3.8 and a LSAT score of 161.5 In a suit filed against the Law School, she claimed that her application was denied because the Law School made race a " 'predominant' factor" in its decision and, in so doing, favored minority applicants with similar credentials.6 After a fifteen-day bench trial, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan determined that the Law School's use of race in its admissions decisions was unconstitutional.7 Using a strict scrutiny standard, the court held that the Law School did not have a compelling interest in a diverse student body, and even if it did, it "had not narrowly tailored its use of race to further that interest."8

The United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, sitting en bane, reversed the district court's decision.9 The court determined that the Supreme Court's decision in Regents of University of California v. Bakke10 established that a university's goal of diversity was a compelling state interest.11 Furthermore, the court held that the Law School's use of race in its admissions policy was narrowly tailored to achieve such an interest.12 The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari to resolve the issue of "[w]hether diversity is a compelling interest that can justify the narrowly tailored use of race in selecting applicants for admission to public universities."13

In a five to four decision, the Court determined that the policy did not violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution.14 In reaching that conclusion, the Court found that the Law School used race in a narrowly tailored fashion in making admissions decisions and did so "to further a compelling interest in obtaining the educational benefits that flow from a diverse student body."15 In the majority opinion, written by justice O'Connor, the Court distinguished the Law School's flexible admissions policy from an unconstitutional quota system.16 The Court noted that nothing prohibited the Law School from "consider [ing] race or ethnicity more flexibly as a 'plus' factor in the context of individualized consideration of each and every applicant."17 Because the Law School's flexible admissions policy took into account many factors other than race, the Court found that the school's diversity goals were broader than race.18 Therefore, the Court concluded that "the Law School's race-conscious admissions program [did] not unduly harm non-minority applicants."19

One of the four justices who did not sign the majority's opinion was Clarence Thomas, the lone African-American member of the Court. justice Thomas wrote a separate opinion in which he concurred in part and dissented in part.20 His opinion attracted attention for two reasons: first, the belief that he has been the beneficiary of those same policies to which he objects, and second, the perception that he has not evaluated accurately his own life experiences which form the basis of his views about affirmative action. …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

Justice Thomas in Grutter V. Bollinger: Can Passion Play a Role in a Jurist's Reasoning?
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.