The University of California, Davis had a quota system reserving 16 out of 100 spots for minority applicants. Bakke argued this violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin in programs receiving federal funding.
The Supreme Court's decision was not unanimous. The justices couldn't agree on a single rationale. However, the central points of contention were:
* Whether race could be considered *at all* as a factor in college admissions: Some justices argued that any consideration of race was inherently discriminatory and violated the Equal Protection Clause.
* Whether the quota system was permissible: Even justices who believed race could be a factor generally agreed that the rigid quota system used by UC Davis was unconstitutional. They saw it as treating race as an overriding factor, rather than one factor among many.
The ultimate outcome was a fractured decision. The Court ruled that the quota system was unconstitutional, thus upholding Bakke's right to be considered for admission without the quota. However, the Court also affirmed the principle that race could be considered as one factor among many in a holistic review of applicants, aiming to achieve a diverse student body. This delicate balance allowed for affirmative action in theory, but severely restricted its implementation through quotas or other rigid numerical targets. The case left the legal landscape surrounding affirmative action ambiguous and continues to be debated today.