The main argument in the case was that Barbara Grutter, who is white, applied for admission to the University of Michigan in 1996. She was rejected but investigated and found out that African Americans and ethnic minorities who had lower overall admissions scores were admitted. Grutter sued, saying she was a victim of illegal discrimination. Grutter's lawyers argued that the admissions program at the university's law school was unconstitutional. They based the argument on a 1978 case, Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, where the court ruled that a school could take race and ethnicity into account -- but couldn't use quotas. Instead, admissions programs must be "narrowly tailored" to harm as few people as possible.

Major issues involving this case would have to be whether the Supreme Court wanted to drastically change the affirmative action program. The program was initially started to help equal out discrimination that minorities were feeling. If the court ruled in favor of the students then affirmative action as we know it would be completely different. Also all school that is state funded would have to change their admissions policies.

Some topics in this essay:
VII OPINION, University Michigan, Supreme Court, Grutter Bollinger, University California, African Americans, III APPEAL, Asian Hispanic, California Bakke, AFFECT DECISION, affirmative action, university michigan, court ruled, student body, law school, diverse student, intervening defendants, race admissions, diverse student body, supreme court, procedures achieve diverse, affect decision, admissions procedures achieve, achieve diverse student, consider race admissions,