QUESTIONS FOR GRUTTER AND GRATZ
GRATZ V. BOLLINGER
1. Who are the petitioners?
2. What race are they?
3. What did the University do to both of them?
4. Why?
5. Describe all the factors the OUA uses for admission.
6. Who are the “underrepresented minorities”?
7. How are “underrepresented minorities” favored in admission?
8. What did the Petitioners do as a result and want for damages?
9. What case did the respondents rely on?
10. Describe the holding in Bakke.
11. What did Hammacher allege the University denied him?
12. Why does the school’s policy violate the Equal Protection Clause?
13. Why did it violate the Equal Protection Clause?
14. Describe Justice Powell’s view in Bakke.
15. What is the only consideration that accompanies the 20 point automatic distribution?
16. How else is this case different than Bakke?
17. What factor further emphasizes the flaws in the University’s system?
18. What is Describe the issue of “individualized review ant the “flagging” by the University.
19. Why does the respondent say the Court’s reasoning is “impractical”?
20. How does the Court respond?
21. Describe what is meant in the last sentence.
GRUTTER V. BOLLINGER
1. What school is involved in this dispute?
2. What does the school’s policy try to achieve?
3. What case are they trying to stay in compliance with?
4. List the factors the school judges the applicants on.
5. What are the “soft variables” the school uses for admission?
6. Describe the school’s use of diversity?
7. How is the law school’s use of diversity different than the undergraduates use in Gratz?
8. What does the school give “special reference” to?
9. What does the policy seek to do?
10. Describe the petitioner Grutter.
11. What did she allege?
12. Why did the 6th Circuit reverse the lower court’s decision?
13. Describe the program in Bakke.
14. Describe the vote in Bakke.
15. Describe Justice Powell’s view.
16. What did he “ground his analysis” on?
17. What did Justice Powell emphasis in his opinion?
18. According to Justice Powell, what diversity does NOT further a compelling state interest and what diversity DOES further a compelling state interest?
19. Describe how important Justice Powell’s decision in Bakke was.
20. What have Courts, however, struggled with?
21. Government racial classifications must be analyzed using what standard?
22. Describe what is necessary to pass the standard.
23. What is strict scrutiny designed to provide?
24. What does the Court endorse?
25. What is at the “heart” of a law school’s mission?
26. In this case, what would be “patently unconstitutional”? Explain
27. Why is the law school’s “critical mass” definition NOT unconstitutional?
28. How is the law school’s claims further bolstered?
29. How can a law school’s admission program be “narrowly tailored”?
30. How is this review of applicant’s files different that that found unconstitutional in Gratz?