Schuette v Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action, 124 S. Ct. 1623 (2014) Case # 4.1, page 117-8
2. Facts: In 2006, Michigan State decided to place on the ballot (proposal 2) to amend Michigan State Constitution prohibiting the University of Michigan, Michigan State University, Wayne State University, public colleges or university, community college, or school district shall not discriminate against, or grant preferential treatment to any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity or national origin in the operation of public education or public contracting.
3. Issue for the court to decide:
Should the court decide to prohibit University and state college from adjusting the college admission process and if so would this violate the Equal Protection Clause?
4. Analysis of the case
The Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment provides that no state shall “deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” A comparable limitation is imposed on the federal government by the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment found on page 108 in the text, …show more content…
If establish that the admission policies process not to discriminate against any individual or group class of persons, then may be amendment proposal 2 may be in violation of Equal Protection Clause. However, because Michigan Constitution was changed did proposal 2 violated the Equal Protection Clause. In order to challenge a statute on equal protection grounds it is first necessary to establish that the statute discriminates against a class of persons. (Page