Abstract
In Grutter v. Bollinger, the Supreme Court ruled that schools are allowed to make “narrowly tailored use of race in admissions decisions to further a compelling interest in obtaining the educational benefits that flow from a diverse student body.” This standard is called “strict scrutiny,” and strict scrutiny applies because the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment prohibits treating people differently on the basis of race. TheGruttermajority claimed to apply “strict scrutiny” to affirmative action. I contend that the nine supposed educational benefits of student body diversity listed in Grutter are paltry, nonexistent, or worse. Significantly, several of the presumed educational benefits are predicated on negative stereotypes about Acad. Quest. (2015) 28:207–223 DOI 10.1007/s12129-015-9499-7
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
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 call
