Samuel Pierce v. Yale University, et al.

Prospective university students starting in the fall of each year are customarily asked to finally decide on a single choice school on May 1 and schools have agreed amongst themselves not to poach students com­ mitted to another school thereafter. Medical schools have taken it further by utilizing a collective admis­ sions process and electronic check that ensure stu­ dents are committed to only one school. Medical schools’ processes and electronic systems also allow schools to view each other’s admissions decisions in real time. The Petitioner, a past medical school appli­ cant, brought suit alleging these restraints violate the Sherman Act. The District Court recognized that in any other context the anticompetitive nature of the re­ straints would give rise to a legally sufficient claim, but looked to the doctrine announced in Bakke and Grutter to conclude student admissions in higher edu­ cation are noncommercial and beyond the power of the courts to supervise. The Court of Appeals affirmed. The question presented is: 1. Whether this Court should overrule its holdings in Bakke and Grutter that ad­ mission of students to professional schools is constitutionally protected ex­ pression.