The Supreme Court has decided to hear a case that will determine to what extent, if any, race can be used in determining admittance to universities nationwide.
At the University of Michigan’s Law School, a group of white students sued the university after they were denied admittance to the school. The students say they were denied because they were white.
“Clearly this is an issue of great national importance. We are looking forward to presenting our cases before the Supreme Court,” said Mary Sue Coleman, University of Michigan president, in a statement. “This is a moment of great significance in our nation’s history. We stand at the threshold of a decision that will have a profound impact on our nation’s higher education system, and on our race relations broadly.”
Across the nation, different appeals-court circuits have issued varying rulings on affirmative action in admissions policies. In Louisiana, Mississippi and Texas, the 5th Circuit Court ruled affirmative action was illegal.
In 1997, the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in Grutter vs. Bollinger that the University of Michigan could consider race in its admission policies to ensure a diverse student body.
Michigan Law School dean Jeffrey Lehman said his school’s admissions policies are constitutional as they comply with the Bakke case, which allows for the consideration of race as a factor in admissions.
“Our admissions policy reflects a cautious approach to affirmative action. It follows the guidelines established by the Supreme Court in the Bakke case 24 years ago,” Lehman said in a statement. “It is both realistic and pragmatic. That is why Secretary of State Colin Powell and former President Gerald Ford have spoken out in support of our admissions policy, as have General Motors, 3M and 30 other major corporations.”
Martin Sweet, a lecturer of political science at the University of Wisconsin, said the decision is likely to go down against affirmative action.
“The decision will probably come out against affirmative action in its direction and strike down the Michigan program, but would leave the door open,” Sweet said.
However, Cliff Conrad, a professor of educational administration at UW, said although a ruling may go against affirmative action, universities will find a way to circumvent the ruling so that race is still a factor.
“Even if the court rules against Michigan, universities have been creative about getting around court decisions,” Conrad said.
Charles Franklin, a UW professor of political science, agrees.
“The court could rule in a narrow way, so as to find something wrong with Michigan’s policy,” Franklin said. “It could be a broad ruling and conceivably reinstate affirmative action.”
Franklin and Conrad both agreed the court might rule in favor of affirmative action.
“I wouldn’t bet the farm on affirmative action going away,” Conrad said.
