Abstract
The Supreme Court of the USA explains when universities may use race‐based admissions policies without violating the Equal Protection Clause of the US Constitution. These rulings raise important ethical issues for universities that are presently using race as a consideration in their admissions decisions. This paper discusses some of the ethical issues presented by the Supreme Court's decisions in the Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, Grutter v. Bollinger, and Gratz v. Bollinger cases. A summary of the Bakke, Grutter, and Gratz cases is provided as well as an analysis of these decisions using an ethical framework that incorporates five perspectives: ethic of critique, ethic of justice, ethic of profession, ethic of care, and ethic of community. The accompanying discussion highlights areas of agreement and conflict between the goals of race‐based university admissions policies and the Bakke, Gratz, and Grutter decisions.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
