Explore BrainMass

Grutter v. Bollinger

This content was COPIED from BrainMass.com - View the original, and get the already-completed solution here!

The Grutter majority opinion (like the Gratz majority opinion) applies â??strict scrutinyâ?
review to the affirmative action plan at issue. Why does strict scrutiny review apply
here? What are the components of strict scrutiny review? The dissenting Justices also
agree that strict scrutiny review applies, but they disagree with the way in which the
majority applies strict scrutiny. What is the crux of this disagreement?

Compare the Grutter majorityâ??s â??narrow tailoringâ? analysis with that in the Rehnquist
and Kennedy dissenting opinions. What â??inferencesâ? do Chief Justice Rehnquist and
Justice Kennedy draw from the facts that the majority does not draw? How do these
inferences distinguish Rehnquistâ??s and Kennedyâ??s reasoning and conclusions from the

© BrainMass Inc. brainmass.com March 21, 2019, 9:20 pm ad1c9bdddf

Solution Preview

Here is some information about the case that may help you get started...good luck!!

Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 306 (2003)

Strict scrutiny is applied because the case of Grutter involved racial classifications. All racial classifications imposed by government must be analyzed by a reviewing court under "strict scrutiny"; this means that such classifications are constitutional under equal protection clause only if they are narrowly tailored to further compelling governmental interests. Whenever the government treats any person unequally because of his or her race, that person has suffered an injury that falls squarely within the language and spirit of the Constitution's guarantee of equal protection.

The majority held that: (1) law school had a compelling interest in attaining a diverse student body; and (2) ...

Solution Summary

Grutter v. Bollinger is clearly summarized in this solution.