Grutter v. Bollinger: Achieving Equality Through Inequality?
Thesis Statement: To fully understand the Supreme Court’s monumental decision in Grutter v. Bollinger, one must investigate the background political climate, comprehend each side’s position and trace the decision’s current impact.
I. Introduction
a. Attention getter
b. Glue sentences/Introductory information
c. Thesis statement
II. Historical Background
a. Origins of affirmative action programs and their original purpose
b. Public opinion and response
c. Ancillary court cases that led to Grutter
III. Overview of Grutter v. Bollinger
a. Grutter’s argument about the violation of her 14th Amendment rights
b. Bollinger’s defense about a “compelling state interest” that justified race …show more content…
Possible impacts of a decision that sided with Grutter
c. Importance of the case in maintaining judicial precedent
V. Conclusion
a. Restate thesis statement
b. Summary of each Supporting Point
c. Closing statement/Clincher
Ani Subbarao
Mrs. Strand
AP Lang. and Comp.
4 May 2015
Grutter v. Bollinger: Achieving Equality Through Inequality? After a long and hard struggle, the 1950’s were the years during which the Civil Rights Movement began to reap the rewards of their toil. In 1952, Brown v. Board of Education not only set forth an enduring legal precedent that declared that “separate was inherently unequal”(Civil Rights Movement), but it also represented a monumental change in governmental mindset. The bureaucrats in Washington slowly, but surely, came to their senses and began to address the social injustices that …show more content…
The Court, citing judicial precedent agreed with the Michigan Law School (Grutter v. Bollinger). The vote, which was 5-4, was razor thin (Grutter v. Bollinger). According to the 5 concurring justices, the biggest determining factor for their vote was the continuation of the precedent established by Justice Powell in Regents (O’Connor). The 5 justices agreed that the Law School did indeed have a “compelling state interest” in promoting campus diversity (Grutter v. Bollinger). Furthermore, they found no violation of any constitutional amendment, since the affirmative action policy did not make use of a quota
Thesis Statement: To fully understand the Supreme Court’s monumental decision in Grutter v. Bollinger, one must investigate the background political climate, comprehend each side’s position and trace the decision’s current impact.
I. Introduction
a. Attention getter
b. Glue sentences/Introductory information
c. Thesis statement
II. Historical Background
a. Origins of affirmative action programs and their original purpose
b. Public opinion and response
c. Ancillary court cases that led to Grutter
III. Overview of Grutter v. Bollinger
a. Grutter’s argument about the violation of her 14th Amendment rights
b. Bollinger’s defense about a “compelling state interest” that justified race …show more content…
Possible impacts of a decision that sided with Grutter
c. Importance of the case in maintaining judicial precedent
V. Conclusion
a. Restate thesis statement
b. Summary of each Supporting Point
c. Closing statement/Clincher
Ani Subbarao
Mrs. Strand
AP Lang. and Comp.
4 May 2015
Grutter v. Bollinger: Achieving Equality Through Inequality? After a long and hard struggle, the 1950’s were the years during which the Civil Rights Movement began to reap the rewards of their toil. In 1952, Brown v. Board of Education not only set forth an enduring legal precedent that declared that “separate was inherently unequal”(Civil Rights Movement), but it also represented a monumental change in governmental mindset. The bureaucrats in Washington slowly, but surely, came to their senses and began to address the social injustices that …show more content…
The Court, citing judicial precedent agreed with the Michigan Law School (Grutter v. Bollinger). The vote, which was 5-4, was razor thin (Grutter v. Bollinger). According to the 5 concurring justices, the biggest determining factor for their vote was the continuation of the precedent established by Justice Powell in Regents (O’Connor). The 5 justices agreed that the Law School did indeed have a “compelling state interest” in promoting campus diversity (Grutter v. Bollinger). Furthermore, they found no violation of any constitutional amendment, since the affirmative action policy did not make use of a quota