This paper discusses the Supreme Court's treatment of the issues in Bakke v. Regents of University of California and its implications for admissions programs. Bakke raised two basic issues in his reverse discrimination suit. First, he argued that Davis's medical school admission program was illegal under Title VI. Second, he claimed unconstitutional and unequal treatment under the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. This paper discusses the three principle opinions by the Supreme Court justices Stevens, Powell, and Brennan. It concludes that the Bakke decision holds Davis's program to be illegal without any consistently agreed upon rationale by the majority. Also, Bakke yields no definitive interpretation of Title VI on whether that title's content is the same or different from the equal protection clause. Bakke settles so little that it is virtually useless as a precedent. The paper notes, however, that many possible admissions systems might measure up to the required standards. (Author/LD)