With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". appeal docketed, No. 03-2415 (1st Cir. Oct. 17, 2003). 17 . See Regents of Univ. of Cal. v. Bakke, 438 U.S. 265, 311-12 & 319, 98 S.Ct. 2733, 57 L.Ed.2d 750 (1978) (noting that a "diverse student body ... is a constitutionally permissible goal for an institution of higher education” but striking down a two-track medical school admissions system that used "explicit racial classification[s]”) (opinion of Powell, J.); Gratz v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 244, 123 S.Ct. 2411, 156 L.Ed.2d 257 (2003) (striking down as not narrowly tailored an undergraduate admissions system that automatically awarded twenty points in admissions scoring to members of under-represented ethnic and racial minority .groups); Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 306, 334 & 328, 123 S.Ct. 2325, 156 L.Ed.2d 304 (2003) (<HOLDING>). 18 . Walsh has a Master’s Degree in

A: holding that universities can  consider race or ethnicity more flexibly as a plus factor in the context of individualized consideration of each and every applicant and that a diverse student body is a sufficiently compelling interest to justify such use of race
B: holding that the race of the prosecutor is irrelevant
C: recognizing that certain forms of race consciousness do not lead inevitably to impermissible race discrimination
D: holding that more favorable treatment of similarly situated employees outside the race classification is required to make a prima facie race discrimination case
A.