Has anyone heard of this or is it just local?
Bush opposes U-M affirmative action
President will tell the Supreme Court that he favors other ways to achieve racial diversity
By Jodi S. Cohen / The Detroit News
WASHINGTON -- President Bush rejected the University of Michigan's affirmative action admissions policies as "fundamentally flawed" and said he would oppose them in a Supreme Court brief filed today.
Bush's strong statement could be influential -- but not necessarily decisive -- in a politically sensitive case that may change college admissions nationwide.
While lauding student diversity on college campuses, he said U-M's undergraduate and law school admissions policies amount to a quota system that "unfairly rewards or penalizes prospective students based solely on their race."
"Quota systems that use race to include or exclude people from higher education and the opportunities it offers are divisive, unfair and impossible to square with the Constitution," Bush said in a six-minute speech from the White House's Roosevelt Room.
It's unclear how Bush's statement will affect him politically at a time when he is trying to increase minority participation in the Republican Party. Several Democrats, including presidential hopeful Rep. Dick Gephardt, ( innvertigo insertion: Hopeful? Ha ha) quickly pounced on Bush's position.
"Affirmative action is an essential tool in expanding educational opportunities to minorities," said Gephardt, a graduate of the University of Michigan Law School.
Michigan Sen. Debbie Stabenow and other members of Congress also issued statements supporting affirmative action and criticizing the president.
Bush left open the question of whether the Supreme Court should allow colleges to consider an applicant's race to any extent, but did suggest that there are other ways to achieve diversity. He cited a Texas plan that guarantees state-college admission to high school students who graduate in the top 10 percent of their high school class.
The court is to rule on the constitutionality of U-M's undergraduate and law school admissions policies. The undergraduate policy gives African-American, Hispanic and Native-American students 20 points on a 150-point scale; applicants who reach 110 points are likely to be admitted. The law school policy allows for the consideration of race when deciding whether to admit a student.
U-M officials rejected Bush's characterization of its school admissions policies as a quota, which the Supreme Court declared unconstitutional 25 years ago. U-M has denied using quotas, but opponents say the school's policies are essentially the equivalent of quotas.
"We do not have, and have never had, quotas or numerical targets in either the undergraduate or law school admissions programs," U-M President Mary Sue Coleman said. "Our goal is to choose among a pool of well-qualified applicants to enroll a student body that is diverse in a rich variety of ways."
Former U-M President Lee Bollinger, a defendant in the lawsuits and now president of Columbia University in New York, said Bush's statements were "a great mischaracterization and deeply unfair."
"It has been understood that you can consider race as a factor and that means necessarily that it can be an important factor, but it is certainly not the only factor," Bollinger said.
Lawyers at the Center for Individual Rights, the law firm representing the white plaintiffs rejected by U-M, said Bush's comments reflect the reasons they have fought to overturn affirmative action in Michigan and nationwide.
"I literally thought as I was listening to his speech that he must have been reading our Web page," spokesman Curt Levey said. "So many of the things he said are things we've been saying for the last five years, including that racial diversity is important. But you have to have it in a way that gives all people a fair chance."
Politically charged
The issue is a politically sensitive one for Bush, who has come out against affirmative action programs but doesn't want to alienate minority voters, especially the growing Hispanic population. Hispanic leaders have been lobbying the Bush administration to support affirmative action and U-M's policies, even meeting with White House counsel Alberto Gonzales earlier Wednesday.
"It will create some distance clearly between him and the leadership of the Latino community and in doing so will affect how Latinos perceive the White House," said Manuel Mirabal, chairman of the National Hispanic Leadership Agenda. "If you are supporting the advancement of Hispanic-Americans ... opposing it would not be something that would be positive for the president."
Theodore Shaw of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, who is representing minority student intervenors in the undergraduate case, criticized Bush for saying he supports diversity, but opposes U-M's programs.
"There is going to be widespread concern, anger, sense of betrayal, consternation on the part of minority communities," Shaw said. "I don't know that his attempt to split the baby is going to work."
Affirmative action observers said it will still be important to assess the language in the administration's Supreme Court brief to see whether Bush lawyers will argue that race should not be considered at all or if U-M merely overemphasizes it as a factor.
The administration's brief is expected to leave to the Supreme Court the issue of whether race can ever be considered when picking a student class.
"As long as the brief doesn't argue that race can be an element in the admissions process, then we are in good shape," said Edward Blum of the conservative American Civil Rights Institute, which plans to file a brief opposing U-M's policies.
The cases began in 1997, when three white students argued that they were rejected by U-M in favor of less qualified minority applicants. A federal appeals court supported U-M's Law School policy in May, and the Supreme Court agreed to hear that case and the undergraduate case last fall.
Oral arguments are expected in late March or early April, with a decision by June or July.
The administration is not obligated to enter the debate, but the White House typically gets involved in major cases. Former Supreme Court clerks said Wednesday that the brief could be influential, especially to Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, generally thought to be the crucial vote in this case.
"One would be naive to think it is insignificant," said Bollinger, who clerked for the late Supreme Court Justice Warren Burger. "It raises the stakes and makes it harder when the -government takes a position."
Other legal experts said a middle-of-the-road brief could help the plaintiffs convince justices such as O'Connor.
"If the administration writes an especially persuasive brief charting a middle position ... that position might be influential to swing justices," said Robert Schapiro, an Emory University law school professor and clerk to Justice Paul John Stevens in 1991-92. "One thing that might be important to some justices is the point that diversity can be achieved by other means."
That was an argument Bush made Wednesday and is expected to be developed in the administration's brief. Texas, California and Florida have eliminated affirmative action and adopted plans that guarantee admission to students in the top of their high school classes.
Campus opinions divided
News of Bush's speech spread quickly through the U-M campus as students organized to show both support and outrage.
Scott Meves, a political science student, called Bush's announcement unfortunate.
"It's a hit to the educational system, it's frustrating and it's discouraging," the 20-year-old junior said. "I would like to think the justices wouldn't take this into consideration, but he's not just another person."
Sarra Navem, 19, of Wixom said she was happy Bush came out against affirmative action.
"We just hear one side of the issue on this campus. The side of the plaintiff isn't being heard," she said.
Longtime affirmative action opponent and U-M Professor Carl Cohen, who brought U-M's policies to light five years ago, was pleased.
"The people who do this are good people but it has a divisive effect," Cohen said. "It is unfair, unjust and a violation of the Civil Rights Act. I hope the Supreme Court sees it that way, too."
Detroit News Staff Writer Margarita Bauza' contributed to this report. You can reach Jodi S. Cohen at (313) 222-2269 or jcohen@detnews.com.
--------------------
America....FUCK YEAH!!!
Words of Wisdom: Individual Rights BEFORE Collective Rights
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." -- Thomas Jefferson
|
Threaded
Previous
Index
Next
Buy Bali Kratom Powder, Maeng Da Thai Kratom Leaf Powder 
Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order 
All-In-One Bags That Don't Suck, Certified Organic All-In-One Grow Bags by Magic Bag
Innvertigo 
Voodoo Doll 
Edit 
Reply 
Maybe i'm just not undestanding you but can you rephrase your question to something that concerns this topic?
1 2 3 all )
thecheese
luvdemshrooms
DoctorJ
rommstein2001
MisterKite