Regents of the University of California v. Bakke concerned affirmative action in admissions. What did the Court rule about quotas and race?

• A. Quotas are constitutional; race cannot be considered at all
• B. Numerical quotas are illegal; race can be a factor in admissions
• C. Race must be the primary factor in admissions
• D. Admissions decisions must be based on random selection

Answer: (B)

The main idea is that the Court rejected fixed numerical quotas but allowed race to be used as one factor among many in admissions. In Bakke, the Court struck down a policy that reserved a specific number of admission slots for minority applicants, finding that rigid quotas violate equal protection. At the same time, the justices said that race could be considered as part of a holistic review to promote diversity, rather than as the sole or decisive criterion. This distinction established that affirmative action could proceed without hard quotas, guiding later decisions that permit race as a factor under careful, non-quota-based approaches.