Mock Trial: Board of Regents v Bakke

For the last mock trial of the semester, our professor for our First Year Seminar class held a remake of the Board of Regents v Bakke case of 1978. This court case draws back to when 35-year old Alan Bakke accused the University of California Medical School for rejecting his application due to his race. Therefore, while the school was trying to be diverse, Bakke claims they were violating the 14th amendment rights which states that all citizens have equal rights. How did they violate this? Well, Bakke felt cheated since his GPA score was significantly higher than the African Americans who were accepted. That being said, our professor in our class split up students into groups to role play as people arguing for the Board of Regents or as Bakke.

Arguing for the Board of Regents: African Americans have been facing inequality for many years. prove that he was rejected based on race, it could’ve been because there were only 100 seats available, Bakke also lacks standing, so this case really should be dismissed. A diverse school is a better school, we wouldn’t want an all-white school, all-black school, so on. By bringing them together more and better relationships can be built. Not only is this an ethical issue, but it’s about the quality of the school. It’s also morally right, not just ethically right.

Arguing for Bakke: If Mr. Bakke’s GPA (out of high school his GPA was 3.51 while other minorities came in with a 2.88 GPA) were higher he should’ve been the one who simply got the spot. The admissions office should be colorblind and not decide who goes to school based on their skin color, they should focus more on the students’ content. The Civil Rights Act applies to EVERYONE and not just blacks, so therefore these rights are violated in this case. Bakke is being discriminated against because he is not a minority. The purpose of affirmative action is to be fair not diverse. Bakke is more than qualified to be accepted so he should’ve been accepted. This leads to reverse discrimination.

Both of these arguments I felt were very persuasive and powerful that it was difficult to decide who to side with. Apparently a lot of the class felt this way as I wasn't the only one questioning myself who had the stronger argument. As it turns out, the decision led to a tie between the arguments just as it did in real life. Though I have never heard of such a thing being possible, I was very shocked by the result.