Grutter v. Bollinger Supreme Court Ruling on College Admissions

On June 28th, 2003, the United States Supreme Court handed down its ruling in the case of Grutter v. Bollinger, which dealt with the issue of race-based admissions in college selection processes. Specifically, the case revolved around two central questions: Firstly, whether Michigan Law School's holistic admission policy violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment; secondly, if it was constitutional under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, which prohibits discrimination based on race by institutions receiving federal funds.

The court ruled that the University of Michigan Law School could consider racial differences among applicants during the admissions process in order to achieve the school's goal of a diverse student body. However, this decision was limited to the specific circumstances of the University of Michigan Law School and did not establish a precedent applicable beyond the school itself or to other universities. This means, while the law allows some degree of consideration of racial factors in admissions decisions, schools must take care to ensure they do so within reasonable limits that meet the goals of providing equal opportunity without creating unjustified racial preferences in their curricula. In essence, the decision allowed colleges more leeway when considering students from different backgrounds but severely curtailed their ability to give preferential treatment on the basis of skin color alone.

In upholding the university's practice, the majority opinion asserted that the program stood up against strict scrutiny—a standard that requires any government policy affecting fundamental rights to serve compelling interests using narrowly tailored measures. While this is true in principle, critics argue that this interpretation effectively grants licence to discriminate on grounds including sex, age, national origin, religion etc., provided such criteria can somehow be tied back into achieving the institution’s official mission of ‘diversity’, regardless of how specious these links might be.

This ruling came after decades of debate over what role, if any, secondary characteristics like gender, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, physical appearance, socioeconomic class, geographic location, etc. ought to play in selecting who gets into elite academic programs. Despite the controversy surrounding the use of race to achieve a diversely populated student body, many believe that there is little evidence supporting the idea that affirmative action policies have made a significant impact on increasing minority enrollment numbers. As a result, even today, debates continue about how best to select the next generation of leaders, especially given the complexities involved in balancing concerns about access with maintaining standards within elite institutions.