Gratz v. Bollinger was the case that struck down the point-based admissions policy.

• A. Grutter v. Bollinger (2003)
• B. Buckley v. Valeo (1976)
• C. Reynolds v. Sims (1964)
• D. Gratz v. Bollinger (2003)

Answer: (D)

This question tests how the Court treats race in university admissions. In Gratz v. Bollinger, the undergraduate program at the University of Michigan used a point-based system that automatically awarded a significant number of points to applicants from certain racial groups. That meant race could push an applicant over the line regardless of individual qualities, effectively functioning like a quota. The Court struck this down as unconstitutional because it did not involve individualized consideration and was not narrowly tailored to achieve the educational benefits of diversity; it failed strict scrutiny.

In the same year, Grutter v. Bollinger upheld a law school admissions policy that considered race as one factor among many in a holistic, individualized review. The key difference is that Gratz automated advantage based on race, while Grutter allowed race to be a part of a careful, case-by-case assessment.

The other cases address topics far removed from admissions policy—campaign finance and legislative districting—so they don’t address the issue at hand.