Ruling will affect colleges

Shannon McCaffrey
Knight Ridder Newspapers

WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court will decide what could be a landmark ruling on affirmative action, agreeing to decide whether universities can use race as a factor in admitting students.

The high court in recent years has chipped away at government affirmative-action programs dealing with such things as government contracts. But it has not spoken on the use of racial preferences in higher education in more than two decades, which leaves legal experts wondering how it will rule.

At issue is whether the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor and its law school violated the Constitution by rejecting white applicants while accepting minority students with lower grades and test scores.

If the high court strikes down such public university programs, it would be a near-fatal blow to the use of affirmative action, which was conceived of as a remedy for discrimination. If it supports the university, it could provide a blueprint for how such programs should work.

James Cott, associate director of the NAACP's Legal Defense and Education Fund, called the pending challenges to affirmative action, both involving the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor, the "most important civil rights cases to come before this court in a quarter of a century."

The cases
The high court's rulings in the Michigan cases will apply directly only to public colleges and universities. But experts say all schools, public or private, that use race-conscious admission policies are likely to take cues from the high court's ruling.

"Whatever the court decides, it will have a profound impact on who goes to colleges and graduate schools in this country. It will have a profound impact on the face and complexion of higher education," said Mark Rahdert, a constitutional law professor and associate dean at Temple University's Beasley School of Law in Philadelphia.

The white students who were turned away claim they were discriminated against in violation of federal civil-rights laws that ban race-based bias, and the Constitution's guarantee of equal legal protection. The university says its intention was simply the enhanced educational benefit that comes when students of diverse racial and ethnic backgrounds live and learn together.

The law school case involved Barbara Grutter, a businesswoman who was denied admission to the Michigan law school in 1996 when she was 43. She claims that minority applicants received preferential treatment, and she still wants to attend law school at Michigan.

In the second case, which involves undergraduates, Jennifer Gratz and Patrick Hamacher argue that they also were denied admission because of race.

The 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati ruled in favor of the University of Michigan's law school in a 5-4 decision handed down in May. The court heard arguments in the undergraduate case but has yet to rule. The high court's decision to hear that undergraduate case before the lower federal court had ruled is unusual.

Attorneys for Grutter called on the Supreme Court to clear up confusion from its 1978 ruling on affirmative action.

In that case, Allan Bakke, a white man, was turned down for admission to medical school at the University of California at Davis while minorities with lower scores were admitted. The school reserved 16 percent of its admission slots for minorities.

In a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court ruled that such racial quotas were impermissible. But Justice Lewis Powell wrote in a separate opinion that schools could consider race as long as they did not use quotas. Universities often have used the late justice's opinion as a benchmark for affirmative action. It also has been criticized as vague.

Grutter's attorneys said there was a "sharp and substantial disagreement in the lower courts about the lawfulness of using race and ethnicity as a factor in admissions to achieve a 'diverse' student body.'

They noted decisions in the U.S. Court of Appeals' 5th and 11th circuits that ruled against affirmative action plans at public universities.

University of Michigan President Mary Sue Coleman said overturning the Bakke ruling "could result in the immediate resegregation of our nation's top universities, both public and private."

"Now is not the time to turn back the clock," she said.

University lawyers said Michigan did not have a quota but sought a "critical mass" of minority students.

"We want enough students so that there are differences of opinion," the university said in court papers.

The university said that between 1992 and 2000, the proportion of minority students at the law school hovered between 13.5 percent and 20 percent. If race were disallowed as an admission factor that number could shrink to 4 percent for an incoming class, they say.

Terry Pell, president of the Washington-based Center for Individual Rights, a conservative public-interest law institute that is representing the white applicants, acknowledged that minority enrollment dropped sharply at flagship public universities in Texas and California after race was eliminated as a factor in admission. But those numbers are rebounding, proof that racial preferences are not needed to secure minorities'educational opportunities, Pell said.

Presidential brief
According to the Boston Globe, President Bush filed briefs arguing that University of Michigan's affirmative action policies give unconstitutional preference to black, Hispanic and Native American applicants.

"I strongly support diversity of all kinds, including racial diversity in higher education," Bush said. "But the method used by the University of Michigan to achieve this important goal is fundamentally flawed.

"At their core, the Michigan policies amount to a quota system that unfairly rewards or penalizes prospective students based solely on their race."

SCSU admissions
As part of the Minnesota State Colleges and Universities system (MnSCU) SCSU does not consider race for terms of admission.

According to Katie Landwehr, associate director of admissions, the university can ask about race when recruiting new students.

For instance, prospective high school students may fill out surveys at college fairs which indicate race. This information is used to inform them of scholarships, including ones based on race that may attract minority students.

"We can target (minority students) with recruitment information," Landwehr said.

All students of color, or non-white students, in the top 20 percent of their class qualify for the Richard Green Scholarship.

According to Landwehr, scholarships based on race make up less than half of scholarships distributed by SCSU. Majority of scholarships are based on academics and open to all races.

Because race is not considered on the admittance application forms it is difficult to pinpoint the population of races on campus. Landwehr estimates that, excluding international students, about 3.5 percent of SCSU students are of color.

How the supreme court rules in this case may affect affirmative action admission polices at public colleges and universities.

The court is expected to rule by the end of June.

What do you think about minorities getting extra points on college applications that may increase chance of admission?

Katie Majkar Sophomore, Elementary Education "It's a benefit to all of us because it gives us a better cultural background, if it's based on culture."

Jeremy Hyde Freshman, undecided "I think that it's bull. If they get good grades and scores on ACTs then why should they need the extra boost?"

Hugh Faundeen Freshman, undecided "It goes against the 14th Amendment that deals with equality and the civil rights act. No group, no matter what race they are, should get any special privileges."

Josh Knaak Sophomore, psychology major "Students should be admitted academically, regardless of race."

Mohammed Abbas Senior, Economy major "I think it's wrong. The standards should be high school GPA and diversity will happen."