That is a step we have never approved. If it is the individual who is entitled to judicial protection against classifications based upon his racial or ethnic background because such distinctions impinge upon personal rights, rather than the individual only because of his membership in a particular group, then constitutional standards may be applied consistently. It was only as the era of substantive due process came to a close, see, e. The court enjoined petitioner from considering respondent's race or the race of any other applicant in making admissions decisions. Here, in contrast, there is no question as to the sole reason for respondent's rejection -- purposeful racial discrimination in the form of the special admissions program. United States, 1944 , but the standard of justification will remain constant. Since minority graduates cannot justifiably be regarded as less well qualified than nonminority graduates by virtue of the special admissions program, there is no reasonable basis to conclude that minority graduates at schools using such programs would be stigmatized as inferior by the existence of such programs.
A clear Supreme Court rejection of affirmative action could rally its supporters and unite them on a wider set of civil rights issues -- a scenario the Bush Administration might not prefer going into an election year, he said. Ribicoff ; 7057 remarks of Sen. Judicial review was provided, at least for actions terminating financial assistance. Nor is it an objection to such relief that preference for minorities will upset the settled expectations of nonminorities. First, there appears to be no reason to question the petitioner's concession.
A great deal of weight hung over the Bakke case as it moved through the courts, and, with enormous publicity surrounding their decision, the Supreme Court justices were keenly aware of the case's importance. First, it may not always be clear that a so-called preference is, in fact, benign. One should not lightly dismiss the inherent unfairness of, and the perception of mistreatment that accompanies, a system of allocating benefits and privileges on the basis of skin color and ethnic origin. What constitutes unequal or unfair treatment? Section 601, imposed the proscription that no person, on the grounds of race, color, or national origin, was to be excluded from or discriminated against under any program or activity receiving federal financial assistance. Secretary of Labor, 442 F. Although isolated statements of various legislators, taken out of context, can be marshaled in support of the proposition that § 601 enacted a purely color-blind scheme, without regard to the reach of the Equal Protection Clause, these comments must be read against the background of both the problem that Congress was addressing and the broader view of the statute that emerges from a full examination of the legislative debates. Human suffering draws no color lines, and the administration of help to the sufferers should not.
And in North Carolina Board of Education v. Hence, respondent is entitled to the injunction, and that portion of the judgment must be affirmed. Act of July 16, 1866, ch. What is required by Congress is the removal of artificial, arbitrary, and unnecessary barriers to employment when the barriers operate invidiously to discriminate on the basis of racial or other impermissible classification. White disadvantaged students were never considered under the special program, and the University acknowledges that its goal in devising the program was to increase minority enrollment. Lowrey gave Bakke the lowest of his six ratings, an 86; his total was 549 out of 600.
V , dealing with employment, proscribe private discriminatory conduct that, as of 1964, neither the Constitution nor other federal statutes had been construed to forbid. In the first place, these statements must be read in the context in which they were made. Other Senators expressed similar views. See also Bickel, The Original Understanding and the Segregation Decision, 69 Harv. The goal of achieving a diverse student body is compelling enough to allow race to be considered as a factor in admissions decisions. Finally, even that action is by no means final, because it is subject to judicial review, and can be further postponed by judicial action granting temporary relief pending review in order to avoid irreparable injury.
First, as petitioner argues, there are no practical means by which it could achieve its ends in the foreseeable future without the use of race-conscious measures. The letter distributed the following year was virtually identical, except that the third paragraph was omitted. County School Board, 1968 , that all reasonable methods be available to formulate an effective remedy. The result was that very few ethnic or racial minorities attended Harvard College. Companie Generale Transatlantique, , 434-435 1940.
But we have never approved preferential classifications in the absence of proved constitutional or statutory violations. Political judgments regarding the necessity for the particular classification may be weighed in the constitutional balance, Korematsu v. An otherwise qualified medical student with a particular background -- whether it be ethnic, geographic, culturally advantaged or disadvantaged -- may bring to a professional school of medicine experiences, outlooks, and ideas that enrich the training of its student body and better equip its graduates to render with understanding their vital service to humanity. Without such findings of constitutional or statutory violations, it cannot be said that the government has any greater interest in helping one individual than in refraining from harming another. .
The result was that very few ethnic or racial minorities attended Harvard College. For example, Senator Humphrey noted the relevance of the Constitution: As I have said, the bill has a simple purpose. It reflects a subjective judgment that is standardless. It then turned to the goals of the University presented as justifying the special program. Its broad mission is education, not the formulation of any legislative policy or the adjudication of particular claims of illegality. Recommendations are then made to the Admissions Committee of the medical school.