Bakke V. Board of Regents- Significance?

This pivotal case was sparked by a white student being denied entry into The University of California, Davis Medical School and blaming it on the reserved 16 spots for "disadvantaged minority" students out of the 100 spots available at the school. Casebriefs.com says: "The Respondent, when compared to students admitted under the special admissions program, had more favorable objective indicia of performance, while his race was the only distinguishing characteristic. The Respondent sued, alleging that the special admissions program denied him equal protection of laws under the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution."

In the end, the court held that although quotas would be banned and that the special admissions program was unconstitutional, although, race was to be an appropriate factor to consider in the admissions process- but was the decision made with reference and motive to achieving diversity?

However, with this decision came many dissenting opinions and for many valid reasons.

As stated on casebriefs.com, "Justices William Brennan (J. Brennan), Byron White (J. Brennan), Thurgood Marshall (J. Marshall), and Harry Blackmun (J. Blackmun) dissent, believing the special admissions program to be constitutional. In particular, the Justices argue that the racial classification in the present case is remedial, serves an important government objective and also substantially related to that objective and thus insulated from the Fourteenth Amendment’s general prohibition of such classifications. J. Marshall writes separately in support of J. Brennan, J. White, J. Marshall, and J. Blackmun. Justice John Paul Stevens (J. Stevens) dissents, citing that Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits the denial of any individual on the basis of race from participation in any program receiving federal funding. J. Stevens argues that prohibiting white students from participation in the special admissions program is a direct violation of Title VI. Concurrence. J. Brennan, J. White, J. Marshall, and J. Blackmun concur so much as the Supreme Court’s opinion allows race to be considered as a factor in the admissions process. However, the Justices believe that in this particular example, race should be allowed as a single determining factor. J. Stevens concurs to the extent that the special admissions program is impermissible. However, J. Stevens holds that the constitutional issue is not reached, because the federal statutory ground (Title VI) prohibits the activity directly."

And along with these dissenting opinions, there was an opinion, as explained in the linked c- span video by civil rights attorney, John Payton, that another concern of minority citizens was if the schools would start to use the significance of color as a negative, rather than how Harvard did, whereas they used race as just one factor to achieve diversity. (https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4459206/bakke-decision-affirmative-action)