University of California v. Bakke

Mock Trial Case

Facts of case

There was a quota system for the admission of African American students, in the University of California in the late 1970's. One Allan Bakke, whom was rejected not once, but twice from the Medical School, argued that this quota system did not follow the equal protection clause; therefore violating his 14th amendment rights. This was due to African American students whom were accepted by the university, held lower test scores than Bakke himself. (See source here)

(See Image Source Here)

Board Argument

The lawyers for the board argued on the idea that this quota system acted as a countermeasure to standing injustices. As anyone in the court would have agreed at the time, there was indeed an exclusivity to higher education. Moreover, this exclusivity favored those from a wealthier background, whom at the time were overwhelmingly white.

The Board held fast, that there was indeed a "Compelling Interest", of the court to right wrongs of history. And, while on the surface level this amendment was written to protect all people, it really strove to bring African Americans to equality. Should there not be this quota system, it would significantly limit the upward mobility of many under-privileged minorities.

Finally, they urged us to remember the law could not, under any circumstances, be used as a weapon. Should Bakke win this argument, it would set a grim precedent of rejected scholars immediately turning into plaintiffs.  This was not the only university in which he had been rejected, therefore it was clear he was lacing in the area of academics.

 Bakke Argument

The Plaintiffs responded by citing all the reasons why Bakke was a well rounded candidate, and "if but for" this quota system, he most definitely would have been accepted. 

Among these qualifications were: the fact he served in military, hence his older age; and his aforementioned higher GPA than the minority students. Bakke's lawyers argued that he would have been accepted, if the playing field stood level with the other students. However, this quota gave African American students a clear advantage.

Furthermore, the 14th is not reserved for African Americans in its protections. While it may have been a tool to bring about equality, it may not also be used to defend inequality. The law was written as colorblind, therefore it should be interpreted as such. In short, Mr. Bakke was being forced to bear an undue burden to right the wrongs of society.

Decision/How I would Rule

 

Historically, the court ruled in favor of Bakke, that such a strict quota system was unconstitutional, however holding onto the concept that race could be one of many factors in determining an ideal candidate.

If I were on the bench, I would have ruled harshly against any consideration of race in an application. The law is in of itself, is an injustice that is wielded by whomever holds the moral high ground. Among the obvious questions before the court were:

 

Who gets to decide whether or not one's race is a burden, or benefit?

Who gets to decide, through race alone, one's trials and tribulations can be determined?

How long can we keep such an unequal law, and still hope for equality?

Who gets to decide which race deserves the benefit of the doubt?

 

The way to serve the underprivileged, would be to account for the economic upbringing of each student. (See Scholarly Article Regarding Affirmative Action) In this way, not only would poor Black students be served, but also those whom were White, Hispanic, Asian, or anyone who lacked the means to receive an equal education.