Affirmative Action Case- Split Decision

[Honeykiss1974]

Race can be used to decide school admissions, court rules
05/14/2002 12:39 PM EDT

DETROIT (AP) - A federal appeals court ruled Tuesday that the University of Michigan law school's policy of considering race in deciding which students to accept is legal.

"We find that the Law School has a compelling state interest in achieving a diverse student body," the court said in its opinion.

In December, the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals heard two hours of arguments from lawyers in two consolidated lawsuits that contend Michigan's law school and undergraduate admissions policies discriminate against whites in favor of less-qualified minorities.

The nine appeals court judges - seven whites and two blacks - took both cases under review. A three-judge panel of the court was to have heard the disputes Oct. 23, but agreed to bypass that usual first step for the issue to quickly go before the full court.

The court said in its filing Tuesday that a separate decision would come down later in the undergraduate case.

The university, which argues that diversity improves the education of all its students, says it considers race among other factors including academic achievement and economic status. The university's policies do not exclude anyone, Michigan says.

But opponents of the university's use of affirmative-action policies said they can amount to illegal discrimination against white applicants who may in some cases have better academic qualifications.

A University of Michigan official declined to comment immediately, saying he had not yet reviewed the ruling. A message seeking comment was left with an attorney with the Center for Individual Rights, which argued the case for the plaintiff.

The Supreme Court hasn't ruled definitively on affirmative action in higher education since the 1978 Bakke decision, when the majority said universities may take race into account in admissions.

Experts had said challenges to the University of Michigan's policies could reach the high court.

The Center for Individual Rights sued over the Michigan policies in 1997.

In March 2001, U.S. District Judge Bernard Friedman struck down the law school's admissions policy, saying the criteria were not clearly defined and relied too heavily on race.

The law school relies on grades and exam scores but considers applicants who, despite low scores, "may help achieve that diversity which has the potential to enrich everyone's education."

To Friedman, diversity was not a good enough reason to factor race into admissions.

"Whatever solution the law school elects to pursue," Friedman said, "it must be race-neutral. The focus must be upon the merit of individual applicants, not upon characteristics of racial groups."


Copyright ©2001 BlackAmericaWeb.com, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

From www.blackamerica.com

[yasava]

I'm curious as to your thoughts on this

Bush May Intervene in Affirmative Action Case
By NEIL A. LEWIS


WASHINGTON, Jan. 14 — President Bush has asked administration lawyers to present him with a brief arguing that the University of Michigan's programs for using race in admission decisions go too far, officials said today.

The officials said Mr. Bush was prepared to have the government file the papers with the Supreme Court on Thursday, a move that would inject the administration into one of the largest affirmative action cases in a generation.

But the White House said Mr. Bush had not yet given the final approval to move ahead. And it was unclear how sweeping a stand the administration would take on the fundamental question of whether race may ever be used as a factor in higher-education admissions decisions.

The case has far-reaching political implications for Mr. Bush. Conservatives fiercely oppose race-based preferences. At the same time, Mr. Bush and the Republicans are trying to court minority voters. The issues are further complicated by the controversy over remarks by Senator Trent Lott of Mississippi that were widely considered racially insensitive and cost Mr. Lott his majority leader post.

The administration has a variety of options even if it decides to argue that the Michigan programs are unconstitutional. Its lawyers could argue that the specific programs and practices of the university rely on race too much, leaving open the notion that universities might be allowed other methods of assuring a diverse student body.

It could also state that any preference based on race or ethnic status is unconstitutional and that universities' claims that the goal is a diverse student body are not enough to justify the race considerations involved in affirmative action.

For weeks, Justice Department lawyers have deliberated with the White House to reach a consensus on how far to go in backing the case filed by white students challenging the constitutionality of the university's admissions policies. The issue has also been the subject of intense debate among senior Bush aides.

Officials have been wrestling over the wording of the brief, which they believe is critical in shaping the political message Mr. Bush wants to send about his views on affirmative action. As the governor of Texas, Mr. Bush opposed racial preferences in public universities and proposed instead that all students graduating in the top 10 percent of all high schools be eligible for admission.

The administration has a Thursday deadline to inform the Supreme Court of its views if it wants to support the three white students who challenged the university's admissions policies in both the undergraduate and law schools. It is not obligated to take a stand.

The Michigan cases have the potential to set broad new guidelines on the heated issue of whether and how much race should play a part in getting into the nation's best universities. It comes a generation after the court's last significant ruling on the issue, the 1978 Bakke case, in which the justices invalidated the use of fixed racial quotas but said that diversity was a worthy goal.

The University of Michigan is one of many institutions that have tried to adopt procedures that would not run afoul of the prohibition against strict quotas but would still allow them to achieve greater diversity in the incoming classes.

Conservatives and other opponents of such affirmative action programs have accused higher education officials of simply evading the strictures and creating programs that operate the same as quotas.

In the Michigan undergraduate case, the university awards extra points to minority candidates, while the law school uses race as one of many factors that could enhance an applicant's chances.

Roger Clegg, general counsel for the Center for Equal Opportunity, which opposes affirmative action programs, said conservatives would not be satisfied by a less than sweeping stand by the White House.

If the administration does not challenge the premise that the search for diversity is a compelling reason to discriminate, Mr. Clegg said, "It would change almost nothing."

"If the door to discrimination is left ajar, colleges and universities will drive a truck through like they have in all the years since Bakke," he said.

The last president to confront a similar problem, Bill Clinton, also had to weigh how to balance firmly enunciated principles against political realities.

While the Clinton administration was philosophically inclined to favor affirmative action, it was obliged to take a middle road when forced to deal with a difficult political case in 1997. The case involved a decision by the Piscataway, N.J., school board to achieve needed budget cuts by laying off a white woman who taught business classes in favor of a black business teacher solely on the basis of race.

The white teacher, Sharon Taxman, was an extraordinarily sympathetic figure to much of the public and a stark example of where affirmative action programs could lead.

In the end, the Justice Department said that firing Ms. Taxman was wrong but that the justices should still allow the use of affirmative action in hiring and promotions.

The Piscataway school board settled the case before it reached Supreme Court arguments.

[yasava]

If other factors are being taken into consideration such as SAT, grades, etc., then I don’t feel race as a consideration is an issue. The way I see it, if you don’t have other things going on for you, then your race doesn’t matter. Being from Michigan, I know several of my black classmates were denied admission because they didn’t have the grades and/or the test scores, so saying that U of M using a “Quota” system is not true, IMO.

[Eclipse]

Originally posted by yasava
If other factors are being taken into consideration such as SAT, grades, etc., then I don’t feel race as a consideration is an issue.

I agree. If Michigan is going to eliminate ALL things other than academic performance then I say let's go for it! Stop admitting all of those strong Black bucks that perform for them on that athletic field that don't meet the qualifications of the university. When you are ready to make THAT happen, come back and talk to me. Until then, I ain't trying to hear it.

[Steeltrap]

Originally posted by Eclipse


I agree. If Michigan is going to eliminate ALL things other than academic performance then I say let's go for it! Stop admitting all of those strong Black bucks that perform for them on that athletic field that don't meet the qualifications of the university. When you are ready to make THAT happen, come back and talk to me. Until then, I ain't trying to hear it.

We all know that won't happen because these schools won't cut off $$$$ they can derive from athletics. It happens a lot out here in Cali, the place where Prop. 209 passed in 1996. The situation is slightly different for private universities such as USC, my alma mater, BTW.

A few weeks ago, the Los Angeles Times did an article about black athletes that contained this unsurprising but mildly startling statistic: a majority of black male students at Division I universities are jocks. What kind of mixed message does that send to our young men -- the only way you can get NEAR a university is balling?

[Munchkin03]

Originally posted by Eclipse


I agree. If Michigan is going to eliminate ALL things other than academic performance then I say let's go for it! Stop admitting all of those strong Black bucks that perform for them on that athletic field that don't meet the qualifications of the university. When you are ready to make THAT happen, come back and talk to me. Until then, I ain't trying to hear it.

I agree with you completely. I noticed that being a scholarship athlete provides the same number of points (20) towards admission as being a "disadvantaged minority". There aren't any lawsuits about that one, are there?

I had heard that in Cali, they started emphasizing socioeconomic and cultural diversity instead of race as a factor in the face of Prop 209, especially in scholarships, which is angering some people. I just applied to UC for grad school, and there were no race questions on my application. There were, however, enough questions about my economic situation, languages spoken at home, and family structure which were obviously made to replace the racial question.

[Steeltrap]

Originally posted by Munchkin03


I agree with you completely. I noticed that being a scholarship athlete provides the same number of points (20) towards admission as being a "disadvantaged minority". There aren't any lawsuits about that one, are there?

I had heard that in Cali, they started emphasizing socioeconomic and cultural diversity instead of race as a factor in the face of Prop 209, especially in scholarships, which is angering some people. I just applied to UC for grad school, and there were no race questions on my application. There were, however, enough questions about my economic situation, languages spoken at home, and family structure which were obviously made to replace the racial question.

Also in Cali, Texas and a few other states, they have this "affirmative access" stuh which guarantees the top 10 percent of all HS graduates admission to the public universities.

Since schools are still segregated, people of color can get in, but I don't like the message it sends -- of course, I'm speaking as someone who participated in a voluntary busing program for six years and never went to a neighborhood school past 1970, when I was tested mentally gifted minor (GATE predecessor).

[ZChi4Life]

I am a UofM alum AND an employee there. The university just sent out an email regarding how the U's undergrad admissions process works. It is based on a point system, which does give additional points to a person who is an underrepresented minority (African American, Native American, and Hispanic). UofM also gives points for test scores, gpa, co-curricular activities, and a plethora of other things. This system is so that the U can admit not just the smartest student, but a student who is well rounded. It also allows us to obtain a diverse student body. I have to say that one side, it does seem a little twisted that we have to look at race to obtain diversity, however, any minority student at UofM will tell you that if they didn't, the school would surely be almost 95-98% caucasian (the caucasian population is already close to 90% as it is) So many factors go into our admissions process for a reason and race is definitely a necessity at this point in time. The media is really making it seem like the U solely looks at race and then decides from there. That's not true.

Also, being a former student and a person that works with students all day (I work in the college's Literature, Science and Arts Advising office), there are QUITE a number of non-minority students that come into that office that make us wonder how the hell they got into UofM. So if anyone wants to argue that we are admitting minority students that are not up-to par with their majority classmates, well, they need to stop by our office. I guarantee you that some of them will definitely make you go HMMMMMM.

[Honeykiss1974]

Would someone kindly point out to Mr. Bush that if he wants to get involved in something, try:

1. getting out public schools back to a proper level of DECENT education
2. getting our economy out of the crapper
3. getting our economy out of the crapper
4. quit spending ONLY 1/2 of a percent of our taxes on social programs. Increase that mofo!

[Honeykiss1974]

Powell Backs U. of M. Affirmative Action
Sun Jan 19, 8:51 PM ET

By SCOTT LINDLAW

WASHINGTON - Secretary of State Colin Powell (news - web sites) said Sunday he disagrees with President Bush (news - web sites)'s position on an affirmative action case before the Supreme Court, as the White House called for more money for historically black colleges.

Powell, one of two black members of Bush's Cabinet, said he supports methods the University of Michigan uses to bolster minority enrollments in its undergraduate and law school programs. The policies offer points to minority applicants and set goals for minority admissions.

"Whereas I have expressed my support for the policies used by the University of Michigan, the president, in looking at it, came to the conclusion that it was constitutionally flawed based on the legal advice he received," Powell said on the CBS program "Face the Nation."

It was a rare public acknowledgment of dissent with the president and with other top White House aides.

National security adviser Condoleezza Rice (news - web sites) said she backed Bush's decision to step into the case before the Supreme Court and to argue that the University of Michigan's methods were unconstitutional. She said on NBC's "Meet the Press" Sunday that there are "problems" with the university's selection policies, and cited the points system.

But she also said race can be a factor in colleges' selection process. The brief the Bush administration filed with the Supreme Court was silent on that issue of whether race can be a factor under some circumstances.

"It is important to take race into consideration if you must, if race-neutral means do not work," she said.

Rice said she had benefited from affirmative action during her career at Stanford University.

"I think they saw a person that they thought had potential, and yes, I think they were looking to diversify the faculty," she said.

"I think there's nothing wrong with that in the United States," Rice said. "It does not mean that one has to go to people of lower quality. Race is a factor in our society."

In a speech to the Republican National Convention in 2000, Powell sharply criticized GOP attacks on affirmative action.

"We must understand the cynicism that exists in the black community," he said. "The kind of cynicism that is created when, for example, some in our party miss no opportunity to roundly and loudly condemn affirmative action that helped a few thousand black kids get an education, but you hardly heard a whimper from them over affirmative action for lobbyists who load our federal tax codes with preferences for special interests."

Sunday on CNN, Powell said he remained "a strong proponent of affirmative action."

Education Secretary Rod Paige is the other black member of Bush's Cabinet.

Paige firmly agrees with Bush's stance, a spokesman said Sunday.

"Secretary Paige believes in equal opportunity for all students and he fully supports President Bush's position on the University of Michigan case," said spokesman Dan Langan. He wasn't sure whether Paige agreed with Rice that race can sometimes be a factor in university admissions.

In an unusual Sunday night announcement, the White House said Bush's budget proposal for the upcoming fiscal year would increase funding by 5 percent for grants to historically black colleges, universities, graduate programs and Hispanic education institutions.

The money affects three programs.

The Historically Black Colleges and Universities program makes grants to 99 eligible institutions to help strengthen infrastructure and achieve greater financial stability.

The Historically Black Graduate Institutions program makes 5-year grants to 18 institutions to expand capacity for providing graduate-level education.

The Hispanic-Serving Institutions program makes grants of up to five years to eligible institutions — those with a full-time population of at least 25 percent Hispanic students, at least 50 percent of which are low-income.

In its brief to the Supreme Court, the administration argued that policies at the University of Michigan and its law school fail the constitutional test of equal protection for all under the law, and ignore race-neutral alternatives that could boost minority presence on campuses.

A White House spokesman declined to say Sunday night why the black and Hispanic grant programs are acceptable, when the University of Michigan admission system is not.

Bush, who drew 9 percent of the black vote in 2000, was attending a predominantly black church on the Martin Luther King Jr. holiday Monday.

[AKA2D '91]

http://www.bamn.com/index.asp

March on Washington: April 1, 2003

[AKA2D '91]

It's today!

[Honeykiss1974]

On the Tom Joyner show, they are broadcasting from outside, among the protestors. I wish I could be there...

[mela3]

Affirmative action may seem not be fair, but neither is life. Affirmative action favors not only African Americans, but all minorities and women of all races. It was put in place to somewhat level off the playing field. And if you look, that is what is has done, to some extent. More minorities and women are in college, getting degrees. The question is what happens after college? It is widely known that women performing the same job, with equal qualifications will make less than a men. I have seen examples where people with "ethnic names" on their resumes get passed up for jobs b/c they are thought to be of less intelligence. All people want is an fair and equal chance to prove themselves, this is what affirmative action suplies.

Now in the field of education, some may say it is different, but it is not. What happens at the U of Michigan happens in other places too, just in different ways. If we want admissions policies to depend on academics and future academic performance than let's make it about education. Let's not give preference to athletes, students who live in the same state as the school, students whose parents are alumni, students whose parents make large donations or any of the other "special circumstances" that allow people admission into schools.

Furthermore, to replace affirmative action with selection by economic status or family structure, as it is done in California, is personally offensive to me. Not all African Americans are poor. We are not clones of each other. All humans have similarities, but they also have an abundance of differences. I always believed that affirmative action was meant to celebrate our differences, by bringing people of different cultures together in a place of learning help to understand each other more. I may be wrong, but I feel that we (America) still need affirmative action.

*** Sorry for the long post***

[ClassyLady]

A bus load of students from my school rode up to DC to participate in the march. I really wish that I could have gone but I have too many tests and assignments due right now