4 - The Michigan Daily - Tuesday, June 24, 2003

OP/ED


420 MAYNARD STREET
ANN ARBOR, MI 48109
letters@michigandaily.com


EDITED AND MANAGED BY
STUDENTS AT THE
UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
SINCE 1890

SRAVYA CHIRUMAMILLA
LOUIE MEIZLISH
Editors in Chief
JASON PESICK
Editorial Page Editor

NOTABLE
QUOTABLE
The University of
Michigan Law School's
mystical critical mass'
justification for its
discrimination by race
challenges even the
most gullible mind."
- U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin
Scalia, in his dissent to the majority's
opinion in Grutter v. Bollinger, the case
challenging the constitutionality of the
Law School's admissions policies.

SAM BUTLER THE SOAPBOX

Unless otherwise noted, unsigned editorials reflect the opinion of the majority of
the Daily's editorial board. All other articles, letters and cartoons do not
necessarily reflect the opinion of The Michigan Daily.

( 7W
*., )4 4 15
1 1b r a k v,
04\
N -V
I , .Q
m's " s ..\' . +'F
~4


VIEWPOINT
Yesterday's victory is tomorrow's challenge

BY EARL LEWIS
In a monumental decision the U.S.
Supreme Court answered an essential
question: Can race continue to be used as
a factor among others in admissions to
American colleges and universities? A
majority of the court answered yes,
upholding the fundamental principle of
the 1978 Bakke decision. On the surface
this is a resounding victory for the Uni-
versity and its supporters -.higher edu-
cation, corporate America, civil rights
organizations and the military. The court
in effect said that on balance there is a
compelling state interest for institutions
such as universities to promote diversity
through the use of race.
Given its complexity - two cases,
different admissions practices and differ-
ent student pools - it is not surprising
that the court upheld the Bakke principle
while at the same time concluding that
not all of the University's practices were
narrowly tailored. A point system
designed in the manner employed by
undergraduate admissions clearly trou-
bled a majority of the court's members.

In his majority opinion, Chief Justice
William Rehnquist found the "factor of
race . . . decisive for virtually every min-
imally qualified underrepresented minor-
ity applicant." This conclusion led the
court to instruct the University to modify
its admissions practices and to decrease
the decisiveness of race, although not
necessarily its centrality.
Today we are to be thankful that the
court listened closely to the University
and its supporters, which marshaled a
storehouse of research data and legal
opinions to support its case. Today we
are to be thankful that universities are
allowed to take the total applicant into
consideration, including an applicant's
academic preparation and high school
achievement, geographic location,
socioeconomic status, special talents,
family ties to the university and of course
race. Today we are to be thankful that the
court rejected the idea that alternative
solutions such as percent plans represent
a viable alternative to current policy.
Today we are to be thankful that the Uni-
versity and its leadership decided to fight.
all the way to the Supreme Court. Today
we are to be thankful that the University

decided to exhibit leadership all around.
Today we are to be reminded that yes-
terday's victory is the first step in a larg-
er process. Those who are opposed to
affirmative action and the University's
stance will not go away. Tomorrow they
will regroup and redirect efforts and push
forward on a new front. Nor should we
lose ourselves in the high of this one win.
The larger challenge of creating a racial-
ly inclusive society looms as large as
ever. Our obligation is to prepare our
campus and the nation to move forward.
Creating access and opportunity is one
thing; creating a diverse society is some-
thing else. Our task will be incomplete
until we tackle the latter and answer a
paraphrased version of Justice Sandra
Day O'Connor's probing question:
"When will practices such as affirmative
action no longer be necessary?" The
answer is not today but perhaps in sever-
al tomorrows. As the University of
Michigan, our responsibility is to lead
the way.
Lewis is dean of the Rackham School of
Graduate Studies, as well as a professor of
history and Afro-American and African studies.

VIEWPOINT
Racial diversity and the equal participation objective

BY ROBERT A. SEDLER
The U.S. Supreme Court has now held
in the University's affirmative action
cases that racial diversity is a compelling
governmental interest justifying the con-
sideration of race as one of the factors in
the admission process. In do doing the
court reaffirmed its 1978 Bakke decision
and the admission practices under which
universities have operated for a quarter-
century. While the justices were divided
in Bakke, most constitutional commenta-
tors, at the time, myself included, main-
tained that the court's holding was found
in the opinion of Justice Lewis Powell. In
that opinion, Powell said that diversity
was a compelling governmental interest
and that a university could take race into
account as one of the factors determining
admission. After Bakke all the universi-
ties revised their affirmative action pro-
grams to conform to the Powell opinion
and have operated under those programs
for the last quarter-century.
In recent times, judicial and political
conservatives have challenged the Pow-
ell opinion in Bakke, insisting that the
U.S. Constitution does not permit a uni-
versity to consider race at all in the
admissions process. In the University's
affirmative action cases, the court came
down squarely on the side of racial
diversity and turned back the conserva-
tive challenge. Justice Sandra Day
O'Connor, writing for the court, said that
we "endorse Justice Powell's view that
student body diversity is a compelling
governmental interest that can justify the
use of race in university admissions."
The court upheld the Law School's affir-
mative action plan, but struck down the
undergraduate affirmative action plan,
because it assigned a large number of

points to race and did not provide for
individual consideration of every appli-
cant. The,University and .the othersuni-
versities will now revise their admissions
programs to ensure that they conform
with the court's decision.
As a result of the court's decision in
the University's case, affirmative action
will continue to be a part of university
admissions, and the nation's universities
will reflect the diversity of the nation
itself.
I now want to relate racial diversity to
what I have called the equal participation
objective. I maintain that there is a very
strong public interest in the full partici-
pation of racial minorities in all impor-
tant areas of American life. When
race-conscious admissions policies for
law schools and medical schools were
first adopted in the 1960s, the primary
purpose for doing so was not to obtain a
racially diverse student body. Rather the
primary purpose was to achieve a racial-
ly diverse profession, to increase the rep-
resentation of racial minorities in the
legal and medical professions, where
they were seriously underrepresented.
Looking to the legal profession, with
which, of course, I am the most familiar,
minority lawyers bring to the profession
the perspective that comes from being a
minority person in America, and the
equal participation of minorities in the
legal profession makes the legal profes-
sion truly representative of all Ameri-
cans. Because of race-conscious law
school admission programs, the represen-
tation of racial minorities in the legal
profession has substantially increased.
The legal profession today is very differ-
ent from what it was a generation ago.
Minority lawyers serve as judges, prose-
cutors and law professors. They are
lawyers for the government, "members

of the firm" and bar association officers.
They are in a position to contribute
directly to the American legal.system, to
make that system responsive to the needs
of minority persons, and to build the con-
fidence of minority persons in the legal
system and the administration of justice
precisely because minority lawyers are an
integral part of that system.
What is true of the public interest in a
racially diverse legal profession is equal-
ly true of every other profession and of
every other area of American life. As a
nation, we are strengthened by .the full
and equal participation of of racial
minorities in the life of our nation. We
need minority doctors, minority profes-
sors, minority executives, minority entre-
preneurs, minority government officials
and so on. For the last generation or so,
following the Bakke decision, most uni-
versities have taken race into account in
admissions in all units of the universi-
ties. While the purpose now may be to
achieve a racially diverse student body,
race-conscious admissions programs also
advance the equal participation objec-
tive. With more and more minority per-
sons graduating from college and from
graduate and professional school, we are
moving in the direction of a truly diverse
society, in which racial minorities will
be full and equal participants with whites
in all important areas of life. Thus, while
the Supreme Court's decision in the Uni-
versity's affirmative action cases ensures
that universities will be able to achieve a
racially diverse student body, it also
serves to advance the equal participation
objective and thus has a significant
impact beyond the walls of academia.
Robert A. Sedler is distinguished professor of
law and Gibbs chair in civil rights and civil
liberties at Wayne State University.

IN PASSING
Perspectives on yesterday's opinions

BY JOHN HONKALA
The U.S. Supreme Court once again
yesterday handed down a decidedly tepid
and unfulfilling decision on affirmative
action. Oh joy.
Both sides, of course, are calling this
one a victory, and I guess they're both
right. Sort of, anyway. The University still

try that most people have made up their
minds about how it should be addressed
long before they can legally drink beer.
Either we want to talk about it or we don't.
And both sides believe their side has the
moral imperative, although the fingers they
point in blame aren't necessarily in the
same direction.
So, we'll move on from here, find new
ways to "promote diversity" that will

BY JASON PESICK

The most interesting thing about the way
that the country has reacted to the opinions
that the court issued yesterday is that every-
one has declared victory. Everybody seems to
be happy with what the court had to say.
This is pretty shocking given this court's
history of dividing the country and of often

,-