LandmarkCases.org got a makeover! As part of this update, all LandmarkCases.org accounts have been taken out of service.
To access "Answers & Differentiation Ideas," users must now use a Street Law Store account. If you don’t have one already, it’s free and easy to sign up. It will also give you access to hundreds of additional resources and Supreme Court case summaries!
We apologize for any inconvenience, but hope that having only one Street Law account to remember will make your life easier. You can reach us at landmarkcases@streetlaw.org with any questions
- About
- About
- Site Credits
- Using the Site
- Legal Concepts
- Teaching Strategies
- Glossary
- About
- Site Credits
- Using the Site
- Legal Concepts
- Teaching Strategies
- Glossary
Regents of the U. of California v. Bakke (1978)
Affirmative Action, Equal Protection
The Cases
- Brown v. Board of Education
- Dred Scott v. Sandford
- Engel v. Vitale
- Gibbons v. Ogden
- Gideon v. Wainwright
- Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier
- Korematsu v. United States
- Mapp v. Ohio
- Marbury v. Madison
- McCulloch v. Maryland
- Miranda v. Arizona
- New Jersey v. T.L.O.
- Obergefell v. Hodges
- Plessy v. Ferguson
- Regents of the U. of California v. Bakke
- Roe v. Wade
- Schenck v. United States
- Texas v. Johnson
- Tinker v. Des Moines
- United States v. Nixon
Overview
"Race or ethnic background may be deemed a ‘plus’ in a particular applicant’s file, yet it does not insulate the individual from comparison with all other candidates for the available seats."
Justice Powell, speaking for the Court
This case explores the legal concept of equal protection.
In the early 1970s, the University of California Davis School of Medicine devised a dual admissions program to increase representation of racial minorities and “disadvantaged” students. Allan Bakke, a White person, applied to and was rejected from the regular admissions program. Applicants of color with lower grade point averages and test scores were admitted under the specialty admissions program. Bakke filed suit, alleging that the dual admissions system violated the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment and excluded him on the basis of race. The Supreme Court found for Bakke against the rigid use of racial quotas, but also established that race was a permissible criterion among several others.
For Students
This section is for students. Use the links below to download classroom-ready .PDFs of case resources and activities.
About the CaseFull Case Summaries
A thorough summary of case facts, issues, relevant constitutional provisions/statutes/precedents, arguments for each side, decision, and case impact.
- High School-Level
- Middle School-Level
Case Background and Vocabulary
Important background information and related vocabulary terms.
- Background Reading (Middle School ·)
- Background Reading (High School ··)
- Background Reading (Advanced ···)
- Vocabulary (Middle School ·)
- Vocabulary (High School/Advanced ··/···)
Visuals
- Diagram of How the Case Moved Through the Court System
- Case summary graphic organizer
Decision
- Summary of the Decision
- Key Excerpts from the Opinion
The Case
- Classifying Arguments Activity
- Applying Precedents Activity
- Understanding the Decision
After the Case
- Applying Precedents Activity: Fisher v. University of Texas (2016)
- The Michigan Affirmative Action Cases
- Cartoon Analysis
- Mini-Moot Court Activity: Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin (2016)
- The 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause
For Teachers
This section is for teachers.
Use the links below to access:
- student versions of the activities in .PDF and Word formats
- how to differentiate and adapt the materials
- how to scaffold the activities
- how to extend the activities
- technology suggestions
- answers to select activities
(Learn more about Street Law's commitment and approach to quality curriculum.)
About the Case- Full Case Summaries: A summary of case facts, issues, relevant constitutional provisions/statutes/precedents, arguments for each side, decision, and impact. Available at a high school and middle school levels.
- Case Background: Background information at three reading levels.
- Case Vocabulary: Important related vocabulary terms at two reading levels.
- Diagram of How the Case Moved Through the Court System
- Case summary graphic organizer
- Decision: A summary of the decision and key excerpts from the opinion(s)
The Case
- Classifying Arguments Activity
- Applying Precedents Activity
- Understanding the Decision
After the Case
- Applying Precedents: Fisher v. University of Texas (2016)
- The Michigan Affirmative Action Cases
- Cartoon Analysis
- Mini-Moot Court Activity: Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin (2016)
- The 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause
Teaching Strategies Used
- Applying Precedents
- Classifying Arguments
- Mini-Moot Courts
- Political Cartoon Analysis
Landmark Cases Glossary
The LandmarkCases.org glossary compiles all of the important vocab terms from case materials. It is provided as a view-only Google Sheet.