Quantcast

Thursday, July 31, 2014         

 Print   Email   Comment | View 1 Comments   Most Popular   Save   Post   Retweet

New affirmative action case at Supreme Court

By Mark Sherman

Associated Press

POSTED:
LAST UPDATED: 06:03 a.m. HST, Mar 25, 2013


WASHINGTON » The Supreme Court is broadening its examination of affirmative action by adding a case about Michigan's effort to ban consideration of race in college admissions.

The justices already were considering a challenge to the University of Texas program that takes account of race, among many factors, to fill remaining spots in its freshman classes. The Texas case has been argued, but not yet decided.

The court today said it would add the Michigan case, which focuses on the 6-year-old voter-approved prohibition on affirmative action and the appeals court ruling that overturned the ban. The new case will be argued in the fall. A decision in the Texas case is expected by late June.

The dispute over affirmative action in Michigan has its roots in the 2003 Supreme Court decision that upheld the use of race as a factor in university admissions. That case concerned the University of Michigan law school.

In response to the court's 5-4 decision in that case, affirmative action opponents worked to put a ballot measure in front of voters to amend the state constitution to outlaw preferential treatment on the basis of race and other factors in education, as well as government hiring and contracting. In November 2006, 58 percent of Michigan voters approved the measure.

Civil rights groups sued to block the provision the day after the vote. In November, the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals voted 8-7 to invalidate the ban as it applies to college admissions. It did not address hiring or contracting.

The appeals court said the constitutional amendment is illegal under Supreme Court rulings from the late 1960s and early 1980s that prohibit placing special burdens on minority groups that want to bring about changes in laws and policies. The court said that forcing opponents of the ban to mount their own long, expensive campaign through the ballot box to protect affirmative action amounts to different, and unequal, treatment.

That burden "undermines the Equal Protection Clause's guarantee that all citizens ought to have equal access to the tools of political change," the court said. By way of example, the court said that children of university alumni remain free to lobby lawmakers and university officials to adopt policies to take family ties into account in admissions.

The 6th Circuit divided along ideological lines, with its more liberal judges in the majority.

Michigan Attorney General Bill Schuette asked the Supreme Court to review the 6th Circuit's ruling. "Entrance to our great colleges and universities must be based upon merit, and I remain optimistic moving forward in our fight for equality, fairness and rule of law at our nation's highest court," Schuette said today.

In the Texas case, a white student who was denied admission to the University of Texas is suing to overturn the school's use of race among many factors to fill out its incoming freshman classes. The bulk of the slots go to Texans who graduated in the top 10 percent of their high school classes.

The Michigan case is Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action, 12-682.






 Print   Email   Comment | View 1 Comments   Most Popular   Save   Post   Retweet

COMMENTS
(1)
You must be subscribed to participate in discussions
By participating in online discussions you acknowledge that you have agreed to the TERMS OF SERVICE. An insightful discussion of ideas and viewpoints is encouraged, but comments must be civil and in good taste, with no personal attacks. Because only subscribers are allowed to comment, we have your personal information and are able to contact you. If your comments are inappropriate, you may receive a warning, and if you persist with such comments you may be banned from posting. To report comments that you believe do not follow our guidelines, email commentfeedback@staradvertiser.com.
Leave a comment

Please login to leave a comment.
EducatedLocalBoy wrote:
The merit only argument is a slippery slope. It is proven that Asians consistently do much better than Caucasians and other ethnic groups in entrance examinations and have higher grades than those groups. A pure merit entrance system would make, for example in California, their State universities' student bodies would be 90% Asian. In fact there are several lawsuits where Asians who had higher grades and entrance exam scores are suing the University of California because they were denied admission in favor of a Caucasian student who had inferior grades and entrance exam scores.
on March 25,2013 | 10:57AM
IN OTHER NEWS
Breaking News
Blogs
Political Radar
`Toss up’

Political Radar
Super

Political Radar
Hilton; Plaza Club

Political Radar
Direct mail

Political Radar
Direct mail

Aperture Cafe
Ramadan #latergram