Court OKs Use of Race in School Admissions

Reuters via Yahoo ^ | Tue May 14,11:10 AM ET | unknown

[B-bone]

DETROIT (Reuters) - The University of Michigan law school can consider race as a factor in deciding what students to accept for admission, a federal appeals court ruled on Tuesday, upholding the school's affirmative-action policies.

In a 5-4 decision, the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals (news - web sites) said the law school's use of race was justified, reversing a decision by a lower court that barred the school's policy as unconstitutional discrimination.

"We reject the district court's conclusion and find that the law school has a compelling interest in achieving a diverse student body," the majority opinion said.

The court is considering another case challenging Michigan's use of race in its undergraduate admissions. That policy was upheld by a district court.

The university contended it must consider the race of its applicants to create a diverse student body and provide a more rounded education.

Michigan has also said race was one factor among several in its policies, that it did not reserve a certain number of slots for minority applicants and that if race was not a factor, the number of minority students would plunge.

The lawsuits were filed by three white students who had been denied admission, and backed by the Center for Individual Rights, an advocacy group that challenges affirmative action. They contended the university's policies illegally discriminated against white students.

Legal experts have said the Michigan cases could be used by the U.S. Supreme Court (news - web sites) to clarify conflicting case law on how colleges and universities can consider race in admissions. A different court of appeals has ruled similar policies unconstitutional.

[B-bone]

This issue looks almost guarenteed to go to he Supreme Court given the conflicting opinions from the different court of appeals.

[Wphile]

We have GOT to get the Senate back!!! Aaarrrghh!

[1L]

Was this an en banc hearing? Since when do Circuit courts use 9 judges on a case?

[Texaggie79]

Democrats are some racists bastages.

[StriperSniper]

the law school has a compelling interest in achieving a diverse student body,"

What the heck is the compelling interest? Proping up race pimps? Keeping leftists from protesting them?

I have yet to hear one good result of forced 'diversity'.

[lormand]

I hear the crumbling sounds of a diminishing Western Civilization getting louder and louder.

[Jim Noble]

This is the question for supporters of this and other similar programs:

What is diverse about blacks who are less able than the whites selected to attend?

Could the same purpose be accomplished by admitting less able whites (of whom there are many), or do the less able students have to be black?

Or is it their skin color that makes them diverse? If so, could not the same purpose be accomplished by admitting blacks who meet the same admission criteria as whites?

What is so special, and vital, about specifically substandard blacks?.

[anniegetyourgun]

There is no doubt in my mind this will be before the SCOTUS. It's a good case to take and given other cases, non-discrimination will probably prevail. But you're right - if even one person on the current court dies, resigns, becomes incompetent, or retires we'll have great trouble....

[Julliardsux]

enbanc is the full panel of judges (usually 11, I think). Remember that the Sixth Circuit is very short on judges right now thanks to Leahy.

[Bahbah]

"...the law school has a compelling interest in achieving a diverse student body," the majority opinion said. There is no compelling interest in admitting unqualified applicants to any school. This empty, bogus reasoning has just got to end.

[Right Wing Professor]

This is going to be a pivotal test for the Bush Administration. If they don't file a brief in favor of the plantiffs (and it's been suggested recently they might not) or, worse, if they side with the University, conservatives on campus will simply abandon the Republican party. This is a make-or-break issue for most of us.

[B-bone]

I don't know much about the various procedures, but the fact that this conflicts with other opinions in other districts (?Texas opinion not to use race?) seems to me like they were trying to trigger a Supreme Court review.

As noted above, this underscores the importance of winning back the Senate this fall.

[Mo1]

The university contended it must consider the race of its applicants to create a diverse student body and provide a more rounded education.

Wee gee I glad to see that they think the color of one skin is more important then a persons high grades ..

Yep that is a more rounded education ... </sarcasm

[Right Wing Professor]

Funniest thng I've seen recently is an advertising brochure for the University of Puerto Rico, which claims to have the most diverse student body in the Country, being 97% Hispanic!

[mhking]

Black conservative ping

If you want on (or off) of my black conservative ping list, please let me know.

[mondonico]

The US Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit is the one that is most affected by the shortage of judges. The Dems' strategy of delay is working--by blocking Bush's judges, they are permitting the erosion of the Constitution by decisions such as this one.

It is clearer than ever that we must take back the Senate. The Constitution depends on it.

Support the National Republican Senatorial Committee today.

(And, to any who feel differently, please spare me the "but they supported a RINO in the primary" whining--what's more of a problem: a RINO we can ditch later or an appellate judge or Supreme Court Justice with life tenure?)

[Right Wing Professor]

As noted above, this underscores the importance of winning back the Senate this fall.

You're assuming Bush will appoint a judge who will rule against 'reverse discrimination'. I wouldn't make that assumption. The Republicans, almost to a man, are squishy on AA, and Bush has been very shaky. I'm hoping he'll do the right thing and file in favor of the plaintiffs, but I wouldn't count on it.

[JohnnyReb1983]

I think the black Americans should be pissed that people are judging these applicants on race even though they are denying blacks instead of whites this time it still is not right. Just like it wasn't right 40 years ago.

[Wphile]

It isn't just the SCOTUS that's at issue here. If W can get his nominations confirmed he can pack the lower courts so that stuff like this doesn't even have to make it to the Supreme Court.

This should be the pivotal issue for conservatives come this fall.

[JohnnyReb1983]

I mean whites instead of blacks this time

[muawiyah]

During the '50s there was massive migration from Southern and Border states into Michigan. For a variety of reasons the authorities in Michigan have always considered it sound public policy to keep folks from Eastern Kentucky and the Southern Mountain areas OUT OF PUBLIC LIFE, including public universities.

It's not surprising at all that this particular court found that to continue to be a wise course of action.

[concerned about politics]

The lawsuits were filed by three white students who had been denied admission,

This would be reverse discrimination. The students were denied access, not because they didn't qualify academically, but because they were white.
It's white racism, pure and simple.

[robertpaulsen]

"...and provide a more rounded education."

If they were truly interested in providing a more rounded education, they would provide more conservative professors. Let's have an affirmative action program for that.

[CWW]

Well, now the 5th and 6th Circuits are in direct conflict. It's VERY likely that the Supremes will hear this case next year and will rule for the 5th Circuit. There is absolutely no compelling interest in creating so-called diversity.

[Tacis]

The court agrees that blacks can't get into Michigan law school based on their own skills and abilities because they are, what, inferior? They need special dispensation solely because of their race? At what point in the educational process do black students remedy the intellectual shortcomings that made the racial handicap appropriate? If in school, isn't that process an illegal racial burden? And, if not in school, why would anyone, whaite or black, do business with them, knowing they are where they are today, not because of what they've accomplished but because they are black? The good part is that this same racial reasoning may get some six foot white guys into the NBA.

[rdb3]

We have GOT to get the Senate back!!!

Amen to that. Judicial nominations and appointments are tremendously important. We can't seat constructionists without the Senate.

[lavaroise]

Oh, who cares, it's just jurisdictions and racist universities getting proped up left and right (sarcasm). They say it only is for consumption, I say it goes further than that.

[rdb3]

--what's more of a problem: a RINO we can ditch later or an appellate judge or Supreme Court Justice with life tenure?

Right on! The same argument can be made as far as Presidents are concerned, too. At the most we will have them for 8 years. The robes sit for life!

[FreedominJesusChrist]

Well, if they want this case to go to the U.S. Supreme Court, and if they want the Court to hear it, they will have to distinguish the difference between this case and another U.S. Supreme Court case practically the same as this one--Regents of the University of California v. Bakke 438 U.S. 265 (1978).

[Regulator]

Which brings up the only logical conclusion of this decision: if race discrimination to create a particular student body racial and ethnic mix is at the discretion of the university, then what would be wrong with a university that chooses to be monoracial? After all, they could just declare it a "compelling need".

[rdb3]

I make the "two wrongs don't make a right" argument against AA one of my primary beefs with it. But the very first beef I have against it is the insult to my intelligence. In other words, let me compete with everyone else by the same rules. Then I'll either sink or swim on my own.

[mhking]

The university contended it must consider the race of its applicants to create a diverse student body and provide a more rounded education.

Would someone tell me what on earth this has to do with getting a law degree!?!?!?!?!????

[Redbob]

"I have yet to hear one good result of forced 'diversity'."

How about "Full employment of your fellow 'ethnics'?"

[tophat9000]

Funniest thing I've seen recently is an advertising brochure for the University of Puerto Rico, which claims to have the most diverse student body in the Country, being 97% Hispanic!

Your kidding.. I have got to see that...(the sad thing is I know its true, the language is being twisted to an Orwellian degree by the left)

[aristeides]

A couple of recess appointments to the Sixth Circuit a few months ago would have meant a majority against reverse discrimination in this case. President Bush has the power to make recess judicial appointments. Why doesn't he make them?

[Right Wing Professor]

The US Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit is the one that is most affected by the shortage of judges. The Dems' strategy of delay is working--by blocking Bush's judges, they are permitting the erosion of the Constitution by decisions such as this one.

I wish I had more confidence a Republican Senate would make a difference. A local conservative legislator I've been working with attached a rider to last years appropriations bill for the University forbidding them from using State money to conduct discriminatory 'diversity' hiring. When it came up for vote, every single Republican legislator (and we are a majority in Nebraska) absented himself/herself from the floor, leaving the amendment to go to an ignominious 20-something to 1 defeat.

For some unfathomable reason, Republicans will not speak out against AA. Will Bush nominate, and a Republican Senate confirm, an SC judge who will strike down preferences? I wish I were more optimistic about that. So far, the only hard data point we have is the undeniable fact that Bush backed preferences in Adarand. It's not a good sign.

[StriperSniper]

your fellow 'ethnics'

No matter what their color.

[concerned about politics]

President Bush has the power to make recess judicial appointments. Why doesn't he make them?

Because he has to ask for Dasholes, Gepfarts, and Kennedys permission. When has he ever asked or listened to ours? You'd think he cared about his base. Don't be silly.
"It's the poll numbers, baby."

[MrB]

most diverse student body in the Country, being 97% Hispanic!

I think we've stumbled upon the real meaning of "diversity"!

diversity = NOT WHITE

[Psycho_Bunny]

It's official! Racism is constitutional and legal!

[fivecatsandadog]

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." Notice the words "may help" and "potential"? Do they have any statistics to back up their statement? Hell no. All they DO know is that this policy will achieve discrimination against (white) intelligent people, but they're going to shove it down our throats and call it diversity. When you force diversity, it's called affirmative action.

[Bob J]

The functional phrase in this story...

... and that if race was not a factor, the number of minority students would plunge.

Here they admit this is not a matter if discimination, that people are not being admission judgedon the color of their skin, but on the content of their knowledge and preparation for the work expected to be done. Now that liberals have admitted that discrimination has been eliminated in University admissions, they have to come up with another excuse to keep the image of bigotry alive (it's the only arrow in their quiver and it's getting quite dull), hence the drivle about diversity as a compelling interest.

I believe the SC has already ruled on this issue, that a University can only use race as a factor if it serves a national compelling interest and that the mechanism for solution be focused and limited to reversing those instances where discrimination has been proven against specific individuals.

[FreedominJesusChrist]

I actually had to read this case during Constitutional Law I this year.

Following the inductions of the 1964 and 1965 Civil Rights Acts, President Johnson believed that these legal barriers alone were not enough for minorities in America to overcome discrimination and to compensate for all of the past discrimination minorities have had to endure. So in 1965, Johnson issued an executive order requiring federal contractors to consider affirmative action in the recruiting, hiring, and promoting of racial minorities. In another executive order issued in 1967, Johnson added another another group to this list of minorities--women.

Allan Bakke, a white medical school applicant, was twice denied admission into the medical school at the University of California at Davis by the "regular" admissions program. However, "disadvantaged" applicants (minorities) were screened by different criteria by the special admissions board. Although more of these minorities had lower undergrad. GPA's and test scores than Bakke had, they were admitted into the school because of the school's quota affirmative action program. Bakke sued on Constitutional grounds, claiming that he was discriminated against because of his race.

There were a couple Constitutional questions here. One was whether or not the 1964 Civil Rights Act was going to be applied to whites also and whether or not Affirmative Action was permissible under the 14th Amendment.

The U.S. Supreme Court affirmed some parts of the these legal questions and reversed others. The Court was initially split, with 4 members asserting that affirmative action plans involving racial classification was permissible under the 14th Amendment, while 4 others believed that any racial considerations violated the 1964 Civil Rights Act. Justice Lewis Powell too a middle of the road approach, believing that affirmative action plans, if wisely written and executed, could pass constitutional and legal scrutiny. His philosophy became a classic transitional decision, for race could be a factor, but only one of many used to seek a balanced and diverse in this case, student body. However, the Supreme Court also decided that an admissions policy based solely on race was unconstitutional. In deciding that race could be a factor in admitting a student, but not the onlyfactor, the Supreme Court came up with a compromise that seemed to satisfy both opposing sides at the time.

[FreedominJesusChrist]

Post #45 was referring to the U.S. Supreme Court case, Regents of the University of California v. Bakke 438 U.S. 265 (1978).

[Khepera]

When are people going to stand up against this government sponsored policy of corruption?

[sheik yerbouty]

This is Unconstitutional. Judicial "activists" belong on the scrap heap of history.

[Rome2000]

I guess this goes to prove that might makes right and there is no justice, just us.

Did it ever occur to these "Judges" that their continued ridiculous disregard of common sense and what is right and just in order to further a leftist political ideology is doomed to failure and backlash?

Liberal lawyers are just as big a threat to the nations survival as terrorists.

When the GOP begins fighting democrats the way they fought the Taliban we'll all be a lot better off.

[FreedominJesusChrist]

"Michigan has also said race was one factor among several in its policies..."

That is the key sentence to this whole ruling. This Federal Court was reflecting parts of the U.S. Supreme Court case, Regents of the University of California v. Bakke.