Case Status: Victory. Supreme Court vacated and remanded case, which was dismissed.
Caetano v. Massachusetts
On behalf of the group Arming Women Against Rape and Endangerment (AWARE), a non-profit dedicated to training women in self-defense, CIR filed an amicus brief in the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts in Commonwealth v.
Case Status: Loss
King v. Burwell; Halbig v. Burwell
CIR represented several members of Congress in an amicus effort designed to support two challenges to the Obama Administration's decision to set aside a provision of the Affordable Care Act ("Obamacare") that limits federal heath…
Case Status: Settled on Favorable Terms
Community Financial Serv. Assoc. of America v. FDIC
CIR filed an amicus brief challenging the Obama administration's Operation Choke Point...
Case Status: Partial Win: The Supreme Court struck down the UM undergraduate admissions system but upheld the law school system.
Gratz & Grutter: Chronology
Timeline of Events June 2003Supreme Court Rules in CIR’s favorThe Supreme Court handed down its rulings in theGratz and Grutter cases. The Court ruled in CIR’s favor in Gratzand in UM’s favor in Grutter.Oral ArgumentsThe Supreme Court hears…
Case Status: Partial Win: The Supreme Court struck down the UM undergraduate admissions system but upheld the law school system.
Gratz & Grutter: Frequently Asked Questions
Question: What is the difference between the Gratz case and the Grutter case? Answer: Gratz v. Bollinger challenged the undergraduate admissions system at UM’s College of Literature, the Arts and Sciences (“LSA”); Grutter v. Bollinger challenged…
Case Status: Partial Win: The Supreme Court struck down the UM undergraduate admissions system but upheld the law school system.
Gratz & Grutter: Who Were Gratz and Grutter?
Both Gratz and Grutter were class action lawsuits. That is, CIR represented the class of all applicants who had been refused admissions on the basis of Michigan’s use of illegal racial preferences. In addition, CIR represented three…
Case Status: Partial Win: The Supreme Court struck down the UM undergraduate admissions system but upheld the law school system.
Gratz & Grutter: Michigan Civil Rights Initiative
Jennifer Gratz Following the lead of states such as California, Florida and Washington, which have elected to eliminate all consideration of race in government contracting, hiring, and state-supported education, Michigan voters passed a ballot initiative…
Case Status: Partial Win: The Supreme Court struck down the UM undergraduate admissions system but upheld the law school system.
Gratz & Grutter: Consequences and Commentary
Taken as a whole, the two decisions may signify the Court’s view that racial preferences are a temporary social expedient that cannot be permanently justified on the basis of the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause.
Case Status: Victory
U.S. v. Elonis
CIR filed an amicus brief in the Supreme Court in the case Elonis v. United States. The petitioner, Anthony Elonis, is appealing his federal conviction for posting rap lyrics on his Facebook page that his…
Case Status: Case settled on favorable terms
Swanigan v. University of Connecticut
CIR is representing Pamela Swanigan, a graduate student in English at UConn. The suit alleges that Swanigan was not allowed to compete for a highly prestigious, merit-based scholarship despite being the top applicant the year…
Case Status: Partial Win: The Supreme Court struck down the UM undergraduate admissions system but upheld the law school system.
Gratz & Grutter: The Rulings
Unfortunately, Gratz and Grutter failed to clarify the law concerning racial preferences. Underlying nearly fifty years of constitutional jurisprudence had been the idea that racial distinctions are inherently irrational and politically dangerous. For this reason, the Court rarely approved…
Case Status: Partial Win: The Supreme Court struck down the UM undergraduate admissions system but upheld the law school system.
Gratz & Grutter: Law School Preferences
The Law School Admissions System Challenged in Grutter Like the undergraduate system the University of Michigan Law School system was (and is) carefully designed to achieve a predetermined racial mix of students. Indeed, the disparities between minority…
Gratz & Grutter: Charting Racial Discrimination: UM Undergraduate Admissions
The University of Michigan undergraduate admission grids Below are links to grids used by the University of Michigan until 1995 to determine undergraduate admission based on race. Ranges of ACT and SAT scores form the…
Case Status: Partial Win: The Supreme Court struck down the UM undergraduate admissions system but upheld the law school system.
Gratz & Grutter: Undergrad Preferences
The Mechanics of Race at the University of Michigan Admissions Grid There were two separate admissions policies at stake in the Michigan cases: the UM’s undergraduate admissions system (Gratz) and the UM’s law school admissions…
Case Status: Partial Win: The Supreme Court struck down the UM undergraduate admissions system but upheld the law school system.
Gratz & Grutter: What Was the Dispute?
“Diversity” or quotas? At issue in Gratz and Grutter were two contentions by the University of Michigan: first, that racial diversity is a compelling state interest that justifies an exception to the 14th Amendment and, second, that dual admissions…
Case Status: Victory
Burke v. Doe
CIR is representing an anonymous Wikipedia editor in a precedent-seeting case designed to establish the First Amendment right of anonymous internet authors to remain anonymous...
Case Status: Victory. Summary Judgment granted by US District Court.
New York P3 v. Walsh: If we win...
New York Counties New York P3 v. Walsh challenges an unconstitutional New York state law. If we win, New York will no longer have the authority to restrict contributions to independent expenditure committees. In addition, a…
Case Status: Victory. Summary Judgment granted by US District Court.
New York P3 v. Walsh: Why a PAC?
One might wonder why a super PAC has First Amendment rights that trump state regulation of campaign contributions. After all, a wealthy individual can make a contribution to a PAC that he knows will be…
Case Status: Victory. Summary Judgment granted by US District Court.
New York P3 v. Walsh: Why New York?
New York is one of the few states that continues to regulate contributions to independent campaign committees despite Supreme Court decisions that make clear that so long as an entity is expressing its views independent…
Case Status: Victory. Summary Judgment granted by US District Court.
New York Progress and Protection PAC v. Walsh
CIR represented the New York Progress and Protection PAC ("NYP3"), an independent campaign committee formed to run television, radio, and print advertisements on behalf of conservative political candidates in New York State. NYP3 was blocked…