Which of the following correctly describes the Bakke decision about race in admissions?

• A. Race may be considered as one factor, but quotas are unconstitutional
• B. Race must be considered as the primary criterion
• C. Race may not be considered at all
• D. Race requirements are unconstitutional in all contexts

Answer: (A)

Race can be used in admission decisions to promote diversity, but not through fixed quotas. In the Bakke decision, the Supreme Court struck down a university policy that set aside a specific number of slots for minority applicants because that was effectively a racial quota governed by a fixed formula. At the same time, the Court allowed race to be considered as one factor among many in a holistic admissions process aimed at achieving a diverse student body, as long as the approach is narrowly tailored and not a rigid quota. That’s why the best description is that race may be considered as one factor, but quotas are unconstitutional. The other options misstate the ruling: race is not required to be the primary criterion, it is not categorically off-limits, and it is not unconstitutional in all contexts.