Front Page     News     Opinion     A & E     Features     Sports     Back Page     Archive     Staff     Contact

OTHER NEWS STORIES - Employers value the diverse education of 'Humanities' - News Briefs Court rekindles affirmative action debate Ebbtide Staff The US Supreme Court has agreed to review its 1978 ruling on Affirmative Action by June of 2003. In Nov. 1998, Initiative 200 passed in Washington disallowing public schools to use race as a determining factor in admission. The initiative has affected admission policies at the University of Washington. In addition to Washington, three other states have passed similar laws. California, Texas and Florida have all passed legislation eliminating race as a qualifier for the preferential treatment of applicants. The Court will hear arguments regarding University Affirmative Action policies. Photo courtesy of www.supremecourtus.gov Recently, Affirmative Action policies at the University of Michigan (UM) drew fire after denying admission to three white applicants. The applicants believe they were subject to racial discrimination, as UM admitted students of preferred races. University of California v. Bakke challenged California's Affirmative Action law in 1978. The results spurred interest in the reformation of Affirmative Action laws. When this case came before the Court, Justice Lewis Powell submitted a lone decision siding with the school. Powell cited that diversity is a compelling interest worth protecting. The three plaintiffs in the UM case, Barbara Grutter, Jennifer Gratz and Patrick Hamacher, found representation with the Center for Individual Rights (CIR). On CIR's web site (www.cir-usa.org), the organization claims that UM has no compelling interest to protect as Powell's decision indicates preferential treatment as a remedy for past discrimination only. The NAACP's legal defense fund (LDF) along with the ACLU is representing the Latino and African-American students in defending UM's policies. The LDF has filed papers with the Court ensuring the presentation of "remedial justification" arguments. These papers request the Court review the necessity of diversification on the UM campus as a compelling argument to preserve affirmative action policies. The LDF asserts from its website (www.naacpldf.org) "[these cases] promise to be the most important civil rights cases in the Supreme Court in the last 25 years." © 2003 Shoreline Community College™