Which best explains why the supreme court’s decision in regents v. bakke angered people on both sides of the affirmative action debate? a. the court issued a two-part decision that struck down some parts of affirmative action while upholding other parts. b. the court issued a two-part decision that struck down use of affirmative action in medical school admissions only. c. the court agreed to allow increased use of racial preferences in california but not in other states. d. the court agreed to allow increased use of racial preferences in college and medical school admissions only.

I believe A is the correct answer.

The correct answer is A.

Regents of the University of California v. Bakke was a landmark decision enacted by the US Supreme Court in 1978. It banned the usage of racial quotas, such as the 16% of seats reserved for minorities that the University of California had established as part of its admission policy. On the other hand, affirmative action was supported, and the Court enabled race to be one of the factors considered for admission at college

the statement the greek philosophers aristotle and plato would be most likely to agree with is statement c, a countries leader should be motivated by the common good of the country.

the answer is b. hope this