The Other Group's Presentation (Mock Trial: Regents of the University of California v. Bakke)

 Mock Trial: Regents of the University of California v. Bakke

Image Found Here

Allan Bakke had tried to enroll in the University of California's medical school, but he was denied acceptance because of a "racial quota." If not for that racial quote, Bakke believed that he would've been accepted. So, this became a case that was backed by the 14th Amendment.

Arguments Against Bakke

The University of California was expected to uphold a racial quota for acceptance into its institution. The racial quota was put into place for a moral reason, that is, it was a program that had been established in order to help uplift a traditionally oppressed minority. It had been done by protecting and using affirmative action. Affirmative action being described as positive reasons to discriminate and categorize groups. It was also discussed that in the lives of black people, the atmosphere of where they went to school is different. For this reason, the black students may have different or even less opportunities than white students, so in order to fill this gap, acceptance for specific numbers of the minority should be considered. The program was put into place to help those who would otherwise be oppressed, not used to harm Bakke.

Arguments For Bakke

Bakke had scored very high on his tests to get into the University of California medical school. High enough where he should've been accepted. He had everything he needed to get in, but he didn't get allowed in because of a racial quota that needed to be filled. It should be determined by survival of the fittest. Whoever has the best and leading grades should get accepted. Economically, it was not a good decision on the universities part because holding Bakke back, who is a smart and young individual, means he does not become successful, therefore harming the economy due to his lack of participation in it. Also, the point of Brown v. Board of Education was to show how in Plessy v. Ferguson it presented how putting people in categories was not how things should go. How that was an incorrect decision. How siding with the University of California was just like siding with Ferguson in the Plessy v. Ferguson decision. Going against Brown in the Brown v. Board decision as well.

Decision

On June 28th, 1978, the court had determined that the Universities use of racial quotas was unconstitutional, but they declared that the use of affirmative action was constitutional.