- [Narrator] Allan Bakke never wanted to be famous,
he just wanted to be a doctor.
Little did he know
that his two failed attempts to gain admission
to medical school would lead to a landmark decision
by the United States Supreme Court.
By the time it was over,
his case would forever cement his story
into the national dialog about affirmative action.
At the time of Bakke's application
the University of California, Davis Medical School
had two separate admissions programs,
a general program that handled
most applicants and a special program
for minority and economically disadvantaged students.
White students could theoretically request consideration
under the special program
if they were economically disadvantaged
but no white student had ever been admitted
through the special program.
In each year's incoming class of 100 students,
84 seats were open for applicants
in the general admissions pool
while the remaining 16 were reserved for minority students
through the special admissions program.
Although Bakke's qualifications were impressive
his scores fell shy of securing
one of the 84 seats available
through the general admissions process
and as a white male of average economic means
Bakke wasn't eligible for the special admissions program.
He was denied admission two years in a row.
In both years candidates were accepted
through the special admissions program
with test scores substantially lower than Bakke's.
Bakke filed suit in California trial court
arguing the special admissions process
violated the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.
Bakke also cited Title VI of the Civil Rights Act
of 1964 which prohibits racial discrimination
by recipients of federal funding.
The trial court agreed with Bakke
and the Supreme Court of California affirmed.
The United States Supreme Court granted cert
to determine whether public institutions
of higher education may use race
in making admission decisions
consistent with the Equal Protection Clause.
The court held that although universities
can use race to evaluate candidates
under some circumstances,
they can't establish a racial quota system,
just as Powell announced the judgment
of a deeply fractured court.
There was no majority opinion
but four justices agreed with Powell
that the university's special admissions program
had discriminated against Bakke.
Powell explained that racial classifications
are inherently suspect
and require application of strict scrutiny.
To survive strict scrutiny,
the racial classification must further
a compelling state interest
and its use must be the least restrictive means available
to achieve that interest.
The university contended that its special admissions program
served compelling interests in remedying past discrimination
facilitating health services and underserved areas
and increasing academic diversity.
First, Powell determined that remedying past discrimination
by society at large wasn't a compelling interest
because the university itself hadn't engaged
in any discrimination.
Next, Powell acknowledged
that promoting health services
in underprivileged areas
might be a compelling interest
but the university failed to establish
that the special admissions program
was actually geared towards accomplishing that purpose.
Finally, Powell agreed that increasing academic diversity
presented a compelling interest,
however, he determined that the special admissions program
wasn't the least restrictive means
to further that interest.
Powell reasoned that there's more to diversity
than skin color and rejected the university's use
of a racial quota system as quote
discrimination for its own sake unquote.
The court thus held the university's admissions program
to be unconstitutional
and affirmed the California Supreme Court's judgment.
Justice Brennan concurring in part
and dissenting in part
would have upheld the upheld admissions program.
In his view, programs that use racial classifications
to remedy past discrimination
serve a compelling state interest
and are thus constitutional.
Justice Marshal also wrote separately
to emphasize his view
that the Equal Protection Clause permits the use
of racial classifications to remedy past discrimination.
Justice Blackman's opinion expressed his belief
that the judiciary was ill-equipped
to judge the wisdom of admissions programs.
He also noted that race must be taken into account
in order to combat racism.
Finally, Justice Stevens concurred in part
and dissented in part.
He wrote that the special admissions program
violated the plain language of Title VI
of the Civil Rights Act of 1964
by excluding Bakke from an institution
that received federal funds.
Because this statutory violation
was sufficient to affirm the judgment below,
Stevens wouldn't have reached the constitutional question.
Bakke was a monumental case on affirmative action
that invalidated the use of racial quota systems.
Due to the fractured nature of the court's ruling
many relevant questions remained unsettled for decades
until they were answered in another landmark decision
nearly a quarter century later
in Grutter versus Bollinger.