October Term 2013 · Docket 12-682
Does a state ban on race-based admissions violate the Constitution?
Michigan voters banned race-conscious admissions. the sides that brought the case claim this violates equal protection. the opposing sides argue the ban protects democratic process.
Verified source milestones
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
The arguments, in order
This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.
Argument 1 ·
What happened at the argument
the sides that brought the case claim the ban targets racial minorities and violates equal protection.
the opposing sides claim the ban preserves democratic choice and does not target racial minorities.
justice_sotomayor_questioned_if_the_ban_reverses_desegregation_efforts_in_michigan
justice_kennedy_asked_if_the_ban_differs_from_previous_cases_involving_racial_preferences
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 1, lines 9-5 — Transcript, file page 1, lines 9-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 19-21 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 19-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 5-9 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 5-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 3-11 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 3-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 5-11 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 5-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 45-31 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 45-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-39 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 41-47 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 41-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 9-19 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 9-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 41, lines 21-35 — Transcript, file page 41, lines 21-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 15-23 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 15-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 47-5 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 47-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 54, lines 23-5 — Transcript, file page 54, lines 23-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 55, lines 25-29 — Transcript, file page 55, lines 25-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 55, lines 35-39 — Transcript, file page 55, lines 35-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 55, lines 7-23 — Transcript, file page 55, lines 7-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 29-39 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 29-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 43-5 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 43-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 5-17 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 5-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 45-47 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 45-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 49-15 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 49-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 43-9 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 43-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 41-43 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 41-43
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
This case tests whether a state can ban race-based preferences in public university admissions. the sides that brought the case argue the ban violates the Equal Protection Clause. the opposing sides argue the ban preserves democratic choice.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 1, lines 9-5 — Transcript, file page 1, lines 9-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 45-31 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 45-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-39 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 41, lines 21-35 — Transcript, file page 41, lines 21-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 55, lines 7-23 — Transcript, file page 55, lines 7-23
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on October 15, 2013.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 5-17 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 5-17
What each side wants
the sides that brought the case want the Court to strike down the state ban on race-based admissions.
the opposing sides want the Court to uphold the state ban on race-based admissions.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 1, lines 9-5 — Transcript, file page 1, lines 9-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 45-31 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 45-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-39 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 41, lines 21-35 — Transcript, file page 41, lines 21-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 55, lines 7-23 — Transcript, file page 55, lines 7-23
What each side says
the sides that brought the case argue the ban violates the Equal Protection Clause by targeting racial minorities.
the opposing sides argue the ban preserves democratic process and does not target racial minorities.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 1, lines 9-5 — Transcript, file page 1, lines 9-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 45-31 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 45-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-39 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 41, lines 21-35 — Transcript, file page 41, lines 21-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 55, lines 7-23 — Transcript, file page 55, lines 7-23
What the justices asked
Justice Sotomayor asked if the ban effectively reverses desegregation efforts in Michigan.
Justice Kennedy asked if the ban differs from previous cases involving racial preferences.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 19-21 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 19-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 5-9 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 5-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 3-11 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 3-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 5-11 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 5-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 41-47 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 41-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 9-19 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 9-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 15-23 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 15-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 47-5 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 47-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 54, lines 23-5 — Transcript, file page 54, lines 23-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 55, lines 25-29 — Transcript, file page 55, lines 25-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 55, lines 35-39 — Transcript, file page 55, lines 35-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 29-39 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 29-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 43-5 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 43-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 5-17 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 5-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 45-47 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 45-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 49-15 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 49-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 43-9 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 43-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 41-43 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 41-43
Why it matters
The outcome defines the scope of state power to regulate race in public education. It shapes how universities design admissions policies. It affects the legal status of race-conscious programs nationwide.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 1, lines 9-5 — Transcript, file page 1, lines 9-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 45-31 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 45-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-39 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 41, lines 21-35 — Transcript, file page 41, lines 21-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 55, lines 7-23 — Transcript, file page 55, lines 7-23
What happens next
This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 19-21 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 19-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 5-9 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 5-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 3-11 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 3-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 5-11 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 5-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 41-47 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 41-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 9-19 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 9-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 15-23 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 15-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 47-5 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 47-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 54, lines 23-5 — Transcript, file page 54, lines 23-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 55, lines 25-29 — Transcript, file page 55, lines 25-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 55, lines 35-39 — Transcript, file page 55, lines 35-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 29-39 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 29-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 43-5 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 43-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 5-17 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 5-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 45-47 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 45-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 49-15 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 49-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 43-9 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 43-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 41-43 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 41-43
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 1, lines 9-5 — Transcript, file page 1, lines 9-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 45-31 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 45-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-39 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 41, lines 21-35 — Transcript, file page 41, lines 21-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 55, lines 7-23 — Transcript, file page 55, lines 7-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 1, lines 9-5 — Transcript, file page 1, lines 9-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 45-31 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 45-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-39 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 41, lines 21-35 — Transcript, file page 41, lines 21-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 55, lines 7-23 — Transcript, file page 55, lines 7-23
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.