Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/12pdf/11-345_l5gm.pdf
Page Number: 8.0

Cite as:  570 U. S. ____ (2013) 

5 

Opinion of the Court 

entering class and was rejected.  She sued the University
and  various  University  officials  in  the  United  States  Dis-
trict Court for the Western District of Texas.  She alleged
that  the  University’s  consideration  of  race  in  admissions 
violated  the  Equal  Protection  Clause.  The  parties  cross-
moved for summary judgment.  The District Court granted 
summary judgment to the University.  The United States 
Court  of  Appeals  for  the  Fifth  Circuit  affirmed.    It  held 
that  Grutter  required courts  to  give  substantial  deference 
to the University, both in the definition of the compelling 
interest in diversity’s benefits and in deciding whether its 
specific  plan  was  narrowly  tailored  to  achieve  its  stated 
goal.  Applying  that  standard,  the  court  upheld  the  Uni-
versity’s admissions plan.  631 F. 3d 213, 217–218 (2011).

Over  the  dissent  of  seven  judges,  the  Court  of  Appeals 
denied petitioner’s request for rehearing en banc.  See 644 
F. 3d 301, 303 (CA5 2011) (per curiam).  Petitioner sought
a writ of certiorari.  The writ was granted.  565 U. S. ___ 
(2012). 

B 
Among  the  Court’s  cases  involving  racial  classifications
in  education,  there  are  three  decisions  that  directly  ad-
dress the question of considering racial minority status as 
a  positive  or  favorable  factor  in  a  university’s  admissions
process, with the goal of achieving the educational benefits 
of  a  more  diverse  student  body:  Bakke,  438  U. S.  265; 
Gratz,  supra;  and  Grutter,  539  U. S.  306.    We  take  those 
cases as given for purposes of deciding this case. 

We begin with the principal opinion authored by Justice
Powell  in  Bakke,  supra.  In  Bakke,  the  Court  considered 
a  system  used  by  the  medical  school  of  the  University  of 
California  at  Davis.    From  an  entering  class  of  100  stu-
dents the school had set aside 16 seats for minority appli-
cants.  In  holding  this  program  impermissible  under  the 
Equal  Protection  Clause  Justice  Powell’s  opinion  stated