The Supreme Court of the USA explains when universities may use race-based admissions policies without violating the Equal Protection Clause of the US Constitution. These rulings raise important ethical issues for universities that are presently using race as a consideration in their admissions decisions. This paper discusses some of the ethical issues presented by the Supreme Court's decisions in the "Regents of the University of California v. Bakke," "Grutter v. Bollinger," and "Gratz v. Bollinger" cases. A summary of the "Bakke," "Grutter," and "Gratz" cases is provided as well as an analysis of these decisions using an ethical framework that incorporates five perspectives: ethic of critique, ethic of justice, ethic of profession, ethic of care, and ethic of community. The accompanying discussion highlights areas of agreement and conflict between the goals of race-based university admissions policies and the "Bakke," "Gratz," and "Grutter" decisions. (Contains 5 notes.)