Adarand Constructors, Inc. v. Peña

Infobox SCOTUS case
Litigants=Adarand Constructors v. Peña
ArgueDate=January 17
DecideDate=June 12
FullName=Adarand Constructors, Incorporated, Petitioner v. Federico Peña, Secretary of Transportation, et al.
Citation=115 S. Ct. 2097; 132 L. Ed. 2d 158; 1995 U.S. LEXIS 4037; 63 U.S.L.W. 4523; 67 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1828; 66 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) P43,556; 78 Rad. Reg. 2d (P & F) 357; 95 Cal. Daily Op. Service 4381; 95 Daily Journal DAR 7503; 40 Cont. Cas. Fed. (CCH) P76,756
Prior=On writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
Holding=All racial classifications, imposed by whatever federal, state, or local government actor, must be analyzed by a reviewing court under a standard of "strict scrutiny," the highest level of Supreme Court review (such classifications are constitutional only if they are narrowly tailored measures that further compelling governmental interests).
JoinMajority=Rehnquist, Scalia, Kennedy, Thomas
JoinDissent2=Ginsburg, Breyer
LawsApplied=U.S. Const. amends. V, XIV

"Adarand Constructors, Inc. v. Peña", ussc|515|200|1995, is a United States Supreme Court case which held that all racial classifications, imposed by whatever federal, state, or local government actor, must be analyzed by a reviewing court under a standard of "strict scrutiny," the highest level of Supreme Court review (such classifications are constitutional only if they are narrowly tailored measures that further compelling governmental interests). Justice Sandra Day O'Connor wrote the majority opinion of the Court, which effectively overturned "Metro Broadcasting, Inc. v. FCC", ussc|497|547|1990, in which the Court had created a two tiered system for analyzing racial classifications.


Many contracts that are let by agencies of the US federal government contain financial incentives for the prime contractor to employ subcontractors that are owned or controlled by “socially and economically disadvantaged individuals.” The US Small Business Administration certifies certain businesses as disadvantaged. This usually means that the business is owned by racial or ethnic minority groups or by women. In this particular case the contract stated that “...the contractor shall presume that socially and economically disadvantaged individuals include Black Americans, Hispanic Americans, Native Americans, Asian Pacific Americans, and other minorities...”

The facts

In 1989 the US Department of Transportation (DOT) awarded a highway construction contract in Colorado to Mountain Gravel and Construction Company. Mountain Gravel solicited bids for a subcontract for guardrails along the highway. The lowest bid was submitted by Adarand Constructors, with a higher bid being submitted by Gonzales Construction. However, Gonzales Construction had been certified by the Small Business Administration as a disadvantaged business, and thus Mountain Gravel awarded the subcontract to Gonzales, due to financial incentives in the Mountain Gravel’s contract for employing disadvantaged businesses. Adarand filed suit in federal court against DOT, arguing that the subcontracting incentive clause, or bonus, that caused Adarand to lose a subcontract was unconstitutional. The federal district court and circuit court ruled in favor of DOT and against Adarand, which then appealed to the US Supreme Court. The case was docketed as "Adarand Constructors, Inc. v. Federico Peña, Secretary of Transportation, et al.", because Federico Peña was the US Secretary of Transportation at that time. Mountain States Legal Foundation [] represented Adarand Constructors.

The question to be decided

Is the presumption of disadvantage based on race alone, and consequent allocation of favored treatment, a discriminatory practice that violates the equal protection principle embodied in the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment?


In September 2005, the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights issued a report finding that, ten years after the "Adarand" decision, federal agencies still largely fail to comply with the rule in "Adarand". Specifically, the Commission found that the Departments of Defense, Transportation, Education, Energy, Housing and Urban Development, and State, and the Small Business Administration, do not seriously consider race-neutral alternatives before implementing race-conscious federal procurement programs. The Commission found that such consideration is required by the strict scrutiny standard under "Adarand" and other Supreme Court decisions. Commissioner Michael Yaki dissented from the Commission's report, arguing that the Commission was taking a "radical step backwards" from the "race-progressive policies" of the past.

ee also

* List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 515

External links

*caselaw source
case="Adarand Constructors, Inc. v. Peña", 515 U.S. 200 (1995)

* [ U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, Federal Procurement After Adarand (September 2005)]

Wikimedia Foundation. 2010.

Look at other dictionaries:

  • Metro Broadcasting, Inc. v. FCC — Supreme Court of the United States Argued March 28, 1990 Decided June …   Wikipedia

  • Federico Peña — Infobox Officeholder name =Federico Fabian Peña imagesize = small caption = order =12th office =United States Secretary of Transportation term start =January 21, 1993 term end =February 14, 1997 deputy = president =Bill Clinton predecessor… …   Wikipedia

  • Mountain States Legal Foundation — (MSLF) is a nonprofit, public interest law firm dedicated to individual liberty, the right to own and use property, limited and ethical government, and economic freedom. MSLF was incorporated in Colorado in 1977 by western business leaders… …   Wikipedia

  • Michigan Civil Rights Initiative — MCRI s executive director Jennifer Gratz War …   Wikipedia

  • Clarence Thomas — Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United …   Wikipedia

  • Landmark decisions in the United States — Landmark cases in the United States come most frequently (but not exclusively) from the United States Supreme Court. United States Courts of Appeal may also make such decisions, particularly if the Supreme Court chooses not to review the case, or …   Wikipedia

  • List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 515 — This is a list of all the United States Supreme Court cases from volume 515 of the United States Reports :* Nebraska v. Wyoming , ussc|515|1|1995 * North Star Steel Co. v. Thomas , ussc|515|29|1995 * Garlotte v. Fordice , ussc|515|39|1995 * Reno… …   Wikipedia

  • Civil Rights Act of 1964 — Full title An act to enforce the constitutional right to vote, to confer jurisdiction upon the district courts of the United States of America to provide relief against discrimination in public accommodations, to authorize the Attorney General to …   Wikipedia

  • Capital punishment in the United States — This article is about capital punishment in the U.S. as a general overview. For the federal government s capital punishment laws, see Capital punishment by the United States federal government. Part of a series on Capital punishment …   Wikipedia

  • Prohibition in the United States — Detroit police inspecting equipment found in a clandestine underground brewery during the Prohibition era Prohibition in the United States (sometimes referred to as the Noble Experiment)[1] was a national ban on the sale, manufacture, and… …   Wikipedia

Share the article and excerpts

Direct link
Do a right-click on the link above
and select “Copy Link”

We are using cookies for the best presentation of our site. Continuing to use this site, you agree with this.