Question

the fatal flaw in the universitys preferential program is its disregard of individual rights as guaranteed by the fourteenth amendment.... such rights are not absolute. but when a states distribution of benefits or placing of burdens hinges on ancestry or the color of a persons skin, that individual is entitled to a demonstration that the challenged classification is necessary to promote an important state interest. the university has failed to carry this burden. -justice lewis powell opinion of the court regents v. bakke which statement best summarizes this passage? fourteenth amendment rights can never be denied. the university failed to justify the denial of fourteenth amendment rights. it is acceptable to discriminate on the basis of ancestry. the university has no interest in protecting fourteenth amendment rights.

Explanation:

The passage states that the university's preferential program disregards individual rights (Fourteenth Amendment). It mentions that when classification (like based on ancestry/skin - color) is used, a state must show it's necessary for an important state interest. The university failed this.

• Option 1: The passage says rights are not absolute, so "never be denied" is wrong.
• Option 3: The passage clearly says discrimination based on ancestry is not acceptable (as it needs to be justified for an important state interest).
• Option 4: The passage is about the university's failure to justify denial of rights, not about lack of interest in protecting rights.

Answer:

The university failed to justify the denial of Fourteenth Amendment rights.