In Regents of the University of California v. Bakke (1978), the Supreme Court ruled that

Question

BlackTom AI · Accepted Answer

Context: The Bakke decision addressed how affirmative action could be implemented in college admissions while prohibiting rigid quotas tied to minority status, and it affirmed that race could be considered as one factor among many.
Option 1: 'quotas and separate admissions standards for minorities were unconstitutional, but affirmative action could be used.' This aligns with Bakke's core holding: explicit quotas or separate admissions standards based solely on race were unconstitutional, but colleges could pursue affirmative action policies that consider race as a factor among others to foster diversity.
Option 2: 'quotas and separate admissions standards for minorities were constitutional, but other forms of affirmative action were unconstitutional.' This is incorrect because the Court struck down quotas and any fixed separate standards; it did not deem them constitutional, and it did not render all other affirmative action unconstitutional. The decision allowed some race-conscious policies under strict scrutiny, so this portrayal is inaccurate.
Option 3: 'all affirmative action policies were unconstitutional.' This is too broad and incorrect. The Court did not make all affirmative action policies unconstitutional; it allowed race-conscious consideration within narrowly tailored frameworks, provided quotas were not used and due process requirements were met.
Option 4: 'all affirmative action policies would be subject to strict scrutiny by the courts.' While strict scrutiny was invoked for race-conscious programs, the statement overgeneralizes by implying every affirmative action policy must undergo strict scrutiny in all contexts without noting that some policies may be permissible if they pass strict scrutiny and are narrowly tailored. The Bakke decision centers on the balance between preventing quotas and permitting race as a factor under appropriate standards, not a blanket rule applying to every policy in every form.
Overall, option 1 captures the nuanced outcome of Bakke by rejecting quotas while permitting race-conscious affirmative action within permissible limits, whereas the other options misstate the ruling or overgeneralize the Court's stance on affirmative action.

In Regents of the University of California v. Bakke (1978), the Supreme Court ruled thatSingle choice

Similar Questions

In its 2014 Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action decision, the Supreme Court ruled that

Which show from the eText discussed a lawsuit challenging affirmative action?

As discussed in class, traditionally affirmative action, if done following the appropriate steps, can be legal, as demonstrated by which of the following league and their rule encouraging interviewing minority candidates?

The Rooney Rule is a NFL policy that requires league teams to interview ethnic-minority candidates for head coaching and senior football operation jobs. This is an example of legal racial discrimination commonly referred to as: _______________

In a 2003 decision, the United States Supreme Court ruled that the University of Michigan __________.

The implementation and loading phase of the Database Life Cycle (DBLC) involves _____.

Which of the following parameters is used to determine the concentration of protein in a spectrophotometer?

More Practical Tools for Students Powered by AI Study Helper

Homework AI Solver

Stylized AI Paper Writer

Plagiarism Checker Assistant

Citation AI Academic Writing Tool

In-Class Translation Assistant

AI Note Generator

AI Quiz Answers

Past Exam Questions from University Test Bank

Smart Practice Assistant

Adaptive Practice

Making Your Study Simpler