Kevin Joyner


This Note examines the burden placed on educational institutions to justify race-conscious admissions programs in light of the Equal Protection Clause. First, this note reviews the facts of the case and the decision in Hopwood. Next, this note provides a background of the law applicable to race-conscious programs by examining: (1) University of California v. Bakke; (2) the underlying theories of interpreting the Fourteenth Amendment; (3) the strict scrutiny standard of review; and (4) the Fourth Circuit's 1994 decision to invalidate a university's race-conscious scholarship program in Podberesky v. Kirwan. Finally, this note analyzes the decision by the Fifth Circuit. The analysis reveals that the decision in Hopwood was overly broad in finding that race could never be used to achieve diversity. However, the analysis shows that the argument suggested by Hopwood that race should not be used as a proxy for diversity is provocative. The analysis explains the difficulty that race-conscious admissions programs have with sustaining constitutional validity, and suggests alternatives to using race in admissions.


To view the content in your browser, please download Adobe Reader or, alternately,
you may Download the file to your hard drive.

NOTE: The latest versions of Adobe Reader do not support viewing PDF files within Firefox on Mac OS and if you are using a modern (Intel) Mac, there is no official plugin for viewing PDF files within the browser window.