-
-
-
-
Court ruled race was a legitimate faactor in college admissioms
-
"Strict scrutiny" meant that affirmative action programs fulfilled a "compelling governmental interest," and were "narrowly tailored" to fit the particular situation. R
-
called for the elimination of any program that "(a) creates a quota; (b) creates preferences for unqualified individuals; (c) creates reverse discrimination; or (d) continues even after its equal opportunity purposes have been achieved."
-
U.S. Court of Appeals suspended the university's affirmative action admissions program and ruled that the 1978 Bakke decision was invalid.
-
A state ban on all forms of affirmative action was passed in California.
-
-
A federal judge ruled that the use of race as a factor in admissions at the University of Michigan was constitutional.
-
A different judge drew an opposite conclusion, invalidating the law school's policy and ruling that "intellectual diversity bears no obvious or necessary relationship to racial diversity. May 14, 2002, the decision was reversed on appeal, ruling that the admissions policy was, in fact, constitutional.
-
Supreme Court (5–4) upholds the University of Michigan Law School's policy, ruling that race can be one of many factors considered by colleges when selecting their students because it furthers "a compelling interest in obtaining the educational benefits that flow from a diverse student body."
-
A bitterly divided court rules, 5–4, that programs in Seattle and Louisville, Ky., which tried to maintain diversity in schools by considering race when assigning students to schools, are unconstitutional.
-
In Fisher v. University of Texas, the court allows universities to continue considering race as a factor in admissions to achieve diversity, but tells them that they must prove that “available, workable race-neutral alternatives do not suffice” before considering race
-