Anonymous
Anonymous asked in Arts & HumanitiesHistory · 9 years ago

What was 1978 Supreme Court decision that rejected the idea of fixed affirmative action quotas, but allowed th?

What was 1978 Supreme Court decision that rejected the idea of fixed affirmative action quotas, but allowed that institutions of higher learning could use race as one factor among many in admissions decisions?

A) Swan v. Charlotte-Mecklenberg Board of Education

B) Regents of the University of California v. Bakke

C) Griggs v. Duke Power

D) San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez

3 Answers

Relevance
  • 9 years ago
    Favorite Answer

    B. Regents of the University of California v. Bakke

    Reverse discrimination became an issue, epitomized by the famous Bakke case in 1978. Allan Bakke, a white male, had been rejected two years in a row by a medical school that had accepted less qualified minority applicants-the school had a separate admissions policy for minorities and reserved 16 out of 100 places for minority students. The Supreme Court outlawed inflexible quota systems in affirmative action programs, which in this case had unfairly discriminated against a white applicant. In the same ruling, however, the Court upheld the legality of affirmative action per se.

    Read more: Affirmative Action History & Timeline (Civil Rights Act, Supreme Court Cases, etc) — Infoplease.com http://www.infoplease.com/spot/affirmative1.html#i...

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 4 years ago

    I agree 100% that those who rape children should be put to death. It has been proven time and time again that those sick bastards can not be cured. How many news stories have you heard where a child is raped and or murdered and the man responsible had been a convicted child molester?A lot. Sad part is, its the same story,the system let that child down. How many more times is the system going to let children down and how many more kids are going to get hurt before the govt. decides to do something. I blame, in part, special interest groups like the ACLU who are always for the rights of the guilty.They are defending NAMBLA (North American Man Boy Love Association). If you talk to any ACLU member and you mention this, their excuse is ALWAYS the same, "We dont advocate having sex with children, but we believe it is with in their right to believe in it." WTF does that mean!!???? Sad part is, if the Supreme Court (which, in itsself, has proven to be a joke) agreed to the death penalty for child rapest,that would have been a great deterent for some of these sick bastards. I guess its going to take a major tragedy for the Supreme Court to make the right decision on this,and by that time,some parent would have lost their child to a violent act. EDIT* St. Louis Cardinals Fan - Are you on CRACK!?? The death penalty is a bad idea because it doesnt allow the rapist to become a better person and to become closer to god? Its kinda hard to be a better person or to be considered a better person when you violently rape a child. The death penalty will allow those sick bastards the oppertunity to be REAL CLOSE to god. Again, this is another instance where the attitude is "forget the victim because the real victim is the rapist and he deserves a second chance." That is sick.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 9 years ago

    b

    • Login to reply the answers
Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.