Written Case Brief
Case Title: Gratz v. Bollinger 2003.
The Law: This case involved the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment, Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and 42 U.S.C. §1981. The Equal Protection Clause says that states must treat every person equally under the law. A state can’t discriminate against a person or a group of people for no good reason (“Bill of Rights Institute...”); there must be a compelling government interest to rationalize any type of discrimination. Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 says that programs that receive federal funding cannot discriminate against a person based on their race. A wronged party can file a complaint with the Department of Justice to pursue a legal course of action (“Title IV of the Civil Rights…”). …show more content…
Hamacher fully intended to apply again to the LSA and transfer from Michigan State University. But, he refused to do so until the University’s manner of considering race was prohibited. He was denied from competing with his fellow applicants on equal footing, due to the bonus points awarded for being a minority-race applicant. Another applicant with his exact credentials, if they were an “underrepresented minority”, would have been admitted. Hamacher had a stake in regard to his past and potential injuries. It is also held that the use of race in admissions by the LSA violated the Equal Protection Clause. Applicants were not assessed individually. Rather, they were first awarded bonus points for race (or not, if caucasian), and then maybe their application would be flagged for further review. This makes race the deciding factor, and therefore the policy is not narrowly tailored to uphold the strict scrutiny of the Court. It was also held that Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and 42 U.S.C. §1981 were violated here. Ultimately, it was a 6-3 decision, in favor of Gratz and