IN THE Supreme Court of the United States

October Term, 1977

No. 76-811

THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, Petitioner, v. ALLAN BAKKE, Respondent.

The United States Supreme Court will hear oral arguments today in the controversial case Regents of the University of California v. Allan Bakke.

The case, which challenges the constitutionality of racial quotas, and perhaps even the concept of affirmative action, has generated widespread concern and interest from such disparate groups as the Congressional Black Caucus and the Anti-Defamation League of the B'nai B'rith (ADL).

Concerned parties have filed 58 amici curiae, or "friend of the court" briefs--the greatest number of such briefs ever submitted for a Supreme Court case, and indicative of the complexity and importance of the suit. Amici curiae briefs provide "third parties" with an interest in the case an opportunity to express their particular viewpoints.

Bakke applied for admission to medical school in 1973 and 1974. Twelve schools--including the University of California Davis Medical School and the University of Minnesota, his alma mater--rejected Bakke's application.

Following his 1974 rejection, Bakke sued the Regents of the University of California, charging that in the same years he applied, the university admitted minority students less qualified than he under the aegis of a special minority admissions program that, he charged, "discriminated against whites on the basis of race."

Both Bakke and the Regents agreed to a limited trial, with Dr. George H. Lowrey, chairman of the U.C. Davis admissions committee and associate dean of student affairs, providing the only testimony. State and federal appellate courts can decide the case only on the basis of this limited trial record.

The trial court ruled that the U.C. Davis special admissions program, because it is effectively closed to white applicants, excludes whites from competition for 16 of the 100 places in a given class, violating the 14th amendment to the Constitution. Any admissions procedure using race as a factor is "arbitrary and unfair," the court reasoned.

However, the court would not order the university to admit Bakke unless he could demonstrate that in the absence of the special program he would not have been rejected.

When both regents and Bakke appealed, the case went directly to the California Supreme Court, bypassing the Court of Appeal "because of the importance of the issues involved," the regents' brief said.

The state Supreme Court upheld the ruling that the special admissions program constitutes a racial quota system and violates the 14th amendment. In addition, when the regents conceded they could not prove Bakke would not have been admitted in the absence of the special program, the state supreme court ordered U.C. Davis admit him, reversing the trial court's ruling on that point.

The University of California regents appealed this ruling to the Supreme Court, and today is their day in court. Maybe. While it is entirely possible that the Supreme Court will either affirm or reverse the prior decision, a third alternative exists, one which would delay any final ruling by months, even years. The Supreme Court may remand the case to the initial trial court to expand the record.