Clarence Thomas: Concurrence/Dissent in Grutter v. Bollinger

A Student’s Guide to Essential Primary Sources
Table of Contents
Clarence Thomas:Concurrence/Dissentin Grutter v. Bollinger
Overview
Document Text

  You don't have access to this content. Please try to log in with your institution. Sign In

Abstract

In 2003 the U.S. Supreme Court decided Grutter v. Bollinger, with the majority opinion sanctioning the use of affirmative action in higher education. Justice Clarence Thomas wrote a separate opinion, concurring in part and dissenting in part from the Court’s judgment, to emphasize his view that government consideration of race for any purpose is unconstitutional. The case involved a challenge to the constitutionality of the University of Michigan Law School’s admission policies, under which the race of any applicant from a historically disadvantaged minority group was considered a “plus” factor in the evaluation of that applicant.

Contents