Source: https://www.casebriefs.com/blog/law/constitutional-law/constitutional-law-keyed-to-chemerinsky/equal-protection/regents-of-the-university-of-california-v-bakke/
Timestamp: 2019-04-24 14:05:45+00:00

Document:
Railway Express Agency, Inc v. New York 336 U.S. 106, 69 S. Ct. 463, 93 L. Ed. 533, 1949 U.S.
Romer v. Evans 517 U.S. 620, 116 S. Ct. 1620, 134 L. Ed. 2d 855, 1996 U.S.
United States Railroad Retirement Board v. Fritz 449 U.S. 166, 101 S. Ct. 453, 66 L. Ed. 2d 368, 1980 U.S.
New York City Transit Authority v. Beazer 440 U.S. 568, 99 S. Ct. 1355, 59 L. Ed. 2d 587, 1979 U.S.
United States Department of Agriculture v. Moreno 413 U.S. 528, 93 S. Ct. 2821, 37 L. Ed. 2d 782, 1973 U.S.
City of Cleburne, Texas v. Cleburne Living Center, Inc 473 U.S. 432, 105 S. Ct. 3249, 87 L. Ed. 2d 313, 1985 U.S.
Korematsu v. United States 323 U.S. 214, 65 S. Ct. 193, 89 L. Ed. 194, 1944 U.S.
Loving v. Virginia 388 U.S. 1, 87 S. Ct. 1817, 18 L. Ed. 2d 1010, 1967 U.S.
Plessy v. Ferguson 163 U.S. 537, 16 S. Ct. 1138, 41 L. Ed. 256, 1896 U.S.
City of Mobile v. Bolden 446 U.S. 55, 100 S. Ct. 1490, 64 L. Ed. 2d 47, 1980 U.S.
Washington v. Davis 426 U.S. 229, 96 S. Ct. 2040, 48 L. Ed. 2d 597, 1976 U.S.
McCleskey v. Kemp 481 U.S. 279, 107 S. Ct. 1756, 95 L. Ed. 2d 262, 1987 U.S.
Palmer v. Thompson 403 U.S. 217, 91 S. Ct. 1940, 29 L. Ed. 2d 438, 1971 U.S.
Personnel Administrator of Massachusetts v. Feeney 442 U.S. 256, 99 S. Ct. 2282, 60 L. Ed. 2d 870, 1979 U.S.
Village of Arlington Heights v. Metropolitan Housing Development Corp 429 U.S. 252, 97 S. Ct. 555, 50 L. Ed. 2d 450, 1977 U.S.
Brown v. Board of Education 349 U.S. 294, 75 S. Ct. 753, 99 L. Ed. 1083, 1955 U.S.
Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education 402 U.S. 1, 91 S. Ct. 1267, 28 L. Ed. 2d 554, 1971 U.S.
Milliken v. Bradley 418 U.S. 717, 94 S. Ct. 3112, 41 L. Ed. 2d 1069, 1974 U.S.
Board of Education of Oklahoma City Public Schools v. Dowell 498 U.S. 237, 111 S. Ct. 630, 112 L. Ed. 2d 715, 1991 U.S.
Regents of the University of California v. Bakke 438 U.S. 265, 98 S. Ct. 2733, 57 L. Ed. 2d 750, 1978 U.S.
Adarand Constructors, Inc. v. Pena 515 U.S. 200, 115 S. Ct. 2097, 132 L. Ed. 2d 158, 1995 U.S.
Frontiero v. Richardson 411 U.S. 677, 93 S. Ct. 1764, 36 L. Ed. 2d 583, 1973 U.S.
Craig v. Boren 429 U.S. 190, 97 S. Ct. 451, 50 L. Ed. 2d 397, 1976 U.S.
United States v. Virginia 518 U.S. 515, 116 S. Ct. 2264, 135 L. Ed. 2d 735, 1996 U.S.
Citation. 438 U.S. 265, 98 S. Ct. 2733, 57 L. Ed. 2d 750, 1978 U.S.
Brief Fact Summary. The Respondent, Bakke (Respondent), a white applicant to the University of California, Davis Medical School, sued the University, alleging his denial of admission on racial grounds was a violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution (Constitution).
Synopsis of Rule of Law. Although race may be a factor in determining admission to public educational institutions, it may not be a sole determining factor.
Facts. The University of California, Davis Medical School reserved 16 spots out of the 100 in any given class for “disadvantaged minorities.”� 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.
Is the special admissions program of the University of California constitutional?
Can race be considered as a factor in the admissions process?

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.