You're reading the wrong ruling:
Huh?
Gratz didn't overturn Grutter. (They were issued the same day.) Grutter says that some things are permissible while Graz says that some other things aren't.
Gratz didn't overturn Grutter. (They were issued the same day.)
Yup ... I was outside the Supreme Court that day, actually. :)
Gratz makes clear that point systems are illegal, which was my claim. I never claimed that affirmative action or race considerations are illegal, writ large.
> Gratz makes clear that point systems are illegal, which was my claim.
The original claim was "They said they didn't lower the "academic" criteria- i.e. test scores and GPA- for minority students."
Grutter said that they could use race to decide admit certain folks according to different criteria than they use for other folks.
Actually, they do. The Supreme Court decision involving the University of Michigan Law School explicitly allowed that practice.
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grutter_v._Bollinger
* The Court's majority ruling, authored by Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, held that the United States Constitution "does not prohibit the law school's narrowly tailored use of race in admissions decisions to further a compelling interest in obtaining the educational benefits that flow from a diverse student body."