This educational guide is based on the linked primary sources. It is not a Court publication, is not affiliated with the Court, and is not legal advice.
In brief
Overview
According to Petitioners (Kirk O. Kolbo), petitioners Jennifer Gratz and Patrick Hamacher contend they were denied admission to the University of Michigan’s College of Literature, Science, and the Arts because the university’s admissions policies discriminate on the basis of race.
Background and question before the Court
According to Petitioners (Kirk O. Kolbo), petitioners argue that the university’s admissions policy, which includes race as a factor, is facially and flagrantly discriminatory.
Chief Justice Rehnquist asked whether plaintiff Patrick Hamacher had standing to bring the case.
According to Chief Justice, the Court also inquired whether the changes to the admissions policy were sufficient to move the case beyond the constitutional line.
What each side argues
Petitioners’ Position
According to Petitioners (Kirk O. Kolbo), the petitioners claim they were denied admission because the university’s admissions policies discriminate on the basis of race.
According to Petitioners (Kirk O. Kolbo), petitioners state that the transfer admissions policy itself is not before the Court.
University of Michigan’s Position
According to University of Michigan, the university notes that about 70 % of the applications reviewed each year are from white students, and the admissions committee can render judgments irrespective of the selection index score.
According to University of Michigan, the design of the admissions program is intended to achieve a critical mass of students from diverse backgrounds, which the university argues is necessary for the educational benefits it asserts.
What happened at oral argument
Chief Justice Rehnquist asked whether plaintiff Patrick Hamacher had standing to bring the case.
According to Chief Justice, the Court inquired whether the changes to the admissions policy were sufficient to move the case beyond the constitutional line.
What the Court decided
Why it matters
Terms to know
No glossary terms are available for this guide.
Primary sources
Read the source materials on the official site or open the immutable repository copy used for this guide.
- 0581e708b50740bcb4c3-r1-0f6bff366204163d.pdforal argument transcript
Guide generated September 20, 2026. Automated validation accepted this version.