In this case of Board of Regents v. Bakke. Mr. Bakke applied in good faith to our universities medical school at Davis twice and without doubt had an acceptable GPA, MCAT, and was worthy of being considered for admission in our school, however, part of our overall mission is to help the unprivileged Americans get a great education. This is right in line with our federal government’s objective to create better opportunities and outcomes for minorities. Minority poverty is a huge problem in America. If we fix this we could fix so many other issues all the way from crime to racism. It is ok to discriminate because it’s the government’s interest. We believe this greater common good is more important than in the plate of one individual white man trying to get into our school.
The equal protection clause of the Constitution states that the clause prohibits any state from denying to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. Unless the government has a specific interest then it is ok to base something on race and clearly in this case we are serving the importance of our federal government by helping more minority students enter the medical profession. This means that more minorities can be successful and not be on federal assistance. This helps raise the standard of living which is clearly an objective of our federal government. Also, The Civil Rights Act prohibits all discrimination, but because the Equal Protection Clause is not violated here there is no discrimination from a legal standpoint.
The case of Board of Regents, (University of California) v. Bakke was a Supreme Court case over the dispute of Allan Bakke believing that he was denied admission to the University of California due to the color of his skin. Bakke was a white man and had better testing scores and grades than some of the African American students that were admitted.
Bakke sued the University of California in a state court, due to the medical school allegedly violating title VI of the civil rights act of 1964 which ended segregation in public places, and employment discrimination. Bakke views this that although he is white, he is more deserving of the spot in the medical program over the others. As well as the 14th amendment’s equal protection clause that had been violated Bakke argued that he legally should not be rejected due to his race, because he was more qualified than the others who had applied over him. In an age aspect, the board used the argument that he was too old to be entered into the program. But Bakke was serving time in the military so he could not apply to the program when he was in his 20’s. He also thought that having a military background would be beneficial to him, but clearly not. The Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision that a state may constitutionally consider race as a factor in its university admissions to promote educational diversity, but only if considered alongside other factors and on a case-by-case basis.
No comments:
Post a Comment