Supreme Court Is Urged to Reject Michigan Affirmative Action Ban

David G. Savage, Los Angeles Times, August 30, 2013

California Atty. Gen. Kamala Harris urged the Supreme Court on Friday to strike down a Michigan voter initiative that bans “preferential treatment” based on race in its state colleges and universities, a ruling that would likely invalidate a similar ban approved by California’s voters in 1996.

These bans on affirmative action “violate the Equal Protection Clause” of the Constitution, Harris said, by “erecting barriers to the adoption of race-conscious admissions policies.”

For a second term in a row, the high court is set to consider a major test of affirmative action in state universities. In June, the court revived a white student’s challenge to a race-based admissions policy at the University of Texas. In October, the court will consider a constitutional challenge that comes from the opposite direction. Lawyers representing black and other minority students are contesting Michigan’s ban on affirmative action.

Separately, the University of California’s president and 10 chancellors filed their own brief Friday highlighting the ban on affirmative action. “More than 15 years after Proposition 209 barred consideration of race in admissions decisions . . . the University of California still struggles to enroll a student body that encompasses the broad racial diversity of the state,” they said.

In 2006, Michigan’s voters approved Proposition 2, 58% to 42%. Using the words of the California measure, the ban said Michigan’s public universities “shall not discriminate against, or grant preferential treatment to, any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, college, ethnicity or national origin.”

Lawyers challenging the measure say that because it became part of the state constitution, they were deprived of the equal chance to lobby for affirmative-action policies in the state Legislature or before university officials. They say they want a Supreme Court ruling that would also wipe out the nearly identical voter-approved bans in California, Arizona, Washington, Nebraska and Oklahoma.

In November, they won an 8-7 ruling by the Cincinnati-based 6th Circuit Court of Appeals, which declared unconstitutional Michigan’s Proposition 2. It “undermines the Equal Protection Clause’s guarantee that all citizens ought to have equal access to the tools of political change,” said Judge R. Guy Cole Jr. His opinion spoke for all eight Democratic appointees to the appeals court, while the seven Republican appointees dissented.

Michigan Atty. Gen. Bill Schuette appealed, and the court will hear arguments in the case of Schuette vs. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action on Oct. 15.


Topics: , ,

Share This

We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.