One of the constraints on a permissible admissions program set out by the Court is the prohibition of "racial balancing" as a purpose. The following passage in Justice Sandra Day O'Connor's opinion of the Court was cited repeatedly by the dissenters: 2 The Law School's interest is not simply "to assure within its student body some specified percentage of a particular group merely because of its race or ethnic origin."(quoting from Bakke) That would amount to racial balancing, which is patently unconstitutional. Consequently, because striving for "population parity" is tantamount to seeking a goal of "racial balancing," both the AAMC and its member medical schools must avoid this formulation as the animating force of our efforts. Instead, institutional language and thinking about the purpose of affirmative action must focus on the educational benefits of diversity. Using this concept, and consistent with the Court recognizing the military and business communities' need for a diverse workforce and leadership cadre, the AAMC views the educational benefits of diversity as including its contributions to improving both the cultural competence of the physicians our schools educate and improving access to care for underserved populations.
