Although the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of affirmative action last summer in cases involving the University of Michigan at Ann Arbor, the political sparring is far from over.
The anti-affirmative action group Michigan Civil Rights Institute has been circulating a petition since January that would put affirmative action on the state ballot this fall. If voters adopt the amendment, the state Constitution would be modified to ban the use of racial preferences in college admissions and government hiring.
Seeking to invalidate the petition, two civil-rights groups sued the Michigan Board of State Canvassers, which certified the petition in circuit court. The judge ruled last week that the language in the petition was unacceptable and misleading because it did not explicitly state that existing law would be changed.
Because the civil-rights group did not sue MCRI, it could not appeal the judge’s decision. The only person who could appeal was Michigan attorney general Mike Cox.
Cox’s office announced Tuesday that the circuit-court ruling would be appealed.
“This appeal is not about the substance of the petition drive; it’s about the process for petitioning,” Cox stated in a release. “The language of the petition clearly meets the test established by Michigan’s courts.”
Matt Davis, spokesperson in the attorney general’s office, said the opposition’s next step will be to file a response that will be assigned to a panel of three judges for review.
One of the groups that sued, By Any Means Necessary, is charging that Cox’s decision to appeal is politically motivated.
“I think the attorney general is against affirmative action, and he’s putting his political interests ahead of the interests of Michigan voters,” said BAMN organizer Kate Stenvig, a senior at the University of Michigan at Ann Arbor.
University of Wisconsin political science professor Howard Schweber said there is a great deal of credence in BAMN’s claims.
“There’s something unusual at a minimum,” Schweber said. “The attorney general is supposed to represent the state of Michigan, and Michigan should be taking the stance of the existing law.”
However, Tim O’Brien, manager of MCRI, cited the conclusions of four professional polls in Michigan that found that the petition would be received favorably and has two-to-one support from voters.
“I think that’s why those opposed to the petition are suing,” O’Brien said. “They know that if it does get to the ballot, it’s all over.”
O’Brien also discussed why he feels this petition is so important.
“We’re determined to prevent our government from separating and discriminating on the basis of color,” he said. “Discrimination is the crack in the liberty bill. It’s been going on all the way back to slavery.”
Stenvig said if the amendment were adopted there would be an immediate 75 percent drop in minority college enrollment in Michigan and described affirmative action as “really an integration program.”
