The New York Times The New York Times Washington June 24, 2003

Search:  



ARTICLE TOOLS
Email This Article E-Mail This Article
Printer Friendly Format Printer-Friendly Format
Most E-mailed Articles Most E-Mailed Articles
Reprints Reprints
Single Page Format Single-Page Format


MULTIMEDIA

The Vote
Graphic: The Vote
Debating Affirmative Action
Audio: Debating Affirmative Action



RELATED

Text of Rulings: Law School Case | Undergraduate

Arguments: Full Text | Audio

Forum: Times reporter Linda Greenhouse will answer readers' questions on the rulings today in the Supreme Court Issues forum.

CHRONOLOGY

In and Out of Court: Affirmative Action

JULY 2, 1964
Civil Rights Act of 1964
The act established legal recourse against discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. This protection covered public accommodations, public transportation, public education, and federally assisted programs.

JUNE 28, 1978
Regents of the University of California v. Bakke
In a 5-to-4 vote, the Supreme Court struck down an admissions program that reserved a fixed number of spots for minorities, but allowed that race may be considered as one of a number of factors. The controlling opinion stated that diversity contributes to a richer educational environment.

MARCH 18, 1996
Hopwood v. University of Texas Law School
The Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit suspended an affirmative action admissions program, outlawing any preferences whatsoever based on race. The decision rejected the Bakke notion of diversity as a compelling state interest.

NOV. 5, 1996
Proposition 209 in California
Californians voted to forbid any consideration of race, gender or national origin in hiring or school admissions.

DEC. 3, 1998
Initiative 200 in Washington
Washington State voters eliminated all preferential treatment based on race or gender in government hiring and school admissions.

FEB. 22, 2000
“One Florida” Initiative
The Florida cabinet enacted the education component of Gov. Jeb Bush’s “One Florida” program, which ended the consideration of race in university admissions and state contracts. It instead called for more aid based on financial need.

JUNE 23, 2003
University of Michigan rulings
The Supreme Court upheld an affirmative action program at the University of Michigan law school, but struck down the undergraduate system that awarded extra points to minority students.



TIMES NEWS TRACKER
TopicsAlerts
Affirmative Action
University of Michigan
Supreme Court
Colleges and Universities
Create Your OwnManage
Most Popular AlertsTake A Tour
Click Here to Subscribe


Real Estate
Spotlight on...
Summer Rentals
Seasonal rentals in the Hamptons, Cape Cod and more...



Golf
Golf homes in California, Virginia, Florida…...




Search Other Areas



Justices Back Affirmative Action by 5 to 4

By LINDA GREENHOUSE

WASHINGTON, June 23 — The Supreme Court preserved affirmative action in university admissions today by a one-vote margin but with a forceful endorsement of the role of racial diversity on campus in achieving a more equal society.

"In order to cultivate a set of leaders with legitimacy in the eyes of the citizenry, it is necessary that the path to leadership be visibly open to talented and qualified individuals of every race and ethnicity," Justice Sandra Day O'Connor wrote in her 5-to-4 majority opinion upholding the University of Michigan's consideration of race for admission to its law school.

Advertisement

At the same time, by a vote of 6 to 3, and with Justice O'Connor in the majority as well, the court invalidated the same university's affirmative action program for admission to its undergraduate college. The difference was in the details: the undergraduate school uses a point system based in part on race.

As a result, the pair of decisions — the court's first in a generation to address race in university admissions — provided a blueprint for taking race into account without running afoul of the Constitution's guarantee of equal protection.

The law school engages in a "highly individualized, holistic review of each applicant's file" in which race counts as a factor but is not used in a "mechanical way," Justice O'Connor said. For that reason, she said, it was consistent with Justice Lewis F. Powell Jr.'s controlling opinion in the Bakke case in 1978, which permitted the use of race as one "plus factor."

The result of today's rulings was that Justice Powell's solitary view that there was a "compelling state interest" in racial diversity, a position that had appeared undermined by the court's subsequent equal protection rulings in other contexts and that some lower federal courts had boldly repudiated, has now been endorsed by five justices and placed on a stronger footing than ever before.

President Bush had asked the court to declare the universities' policies unconstitutional.

Although the four dissenters in the law school case did not directly confront the continued validity of the Bakke precedent, it was clear that both Justices Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia would have overturned it if they could. "Every time the government places citizens on racial registers and makes race relevant to the provision of burdens or benefits, it demeans us all," Justice Thomas said in a dissenting opinion that Justice Scalia also signed.

Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist wrote the principal dissenting opinion that spoke for all four, including Justice Anthony M. Kennedy. He took a more oblique approach that attacked the law school program not so much for its premise as for how it works in practice, dismissing it as "a carefully managed program designed to ensure proportionate representation of applicants from selected minority groups."

Justice Kennedy, writing separately, said that Justice Powell's opinion in the Bakke case "states the correct rule for resolving this case," but that the court had not applied the "meaningful strict scrutiny" under which the program should have been found unconstitutional.

Joining Justice O'Connor's majority opinion in Grutter v. Bollinger, No. 02-241, were Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who wrote a brief concurring opinion, and Justices John Paul Stevens, David H. Souter and Stephen G. Breyer.

By contrast with the law school, the admissions program for Michigan's College of Literature, Science, and the Arts awards 20 points on a scale of 150 for membership in an underrepresented minority group — blacks, Hispanics, and American Indians — with 100 points guaranteeing admission to the university's main undergraduate school. Fixed numbers of points are also awarded for other factors, including alumni connections, geography and athletics.

The inclusion of race on the scale, with the result that nearly all qualified minority applicants are admitted to the competitive program while many qualified white students are turned away, demonstrates the absence of the "individualized consideration" that the Bakke decision required, Chief Justice Rehnquist wrote. Justice O'Connor echoed that conclusion, describing the undergraduate program as a "nonindividualized, mechanical one."

Continued
1 | 2 | Next>>



newspaper The International Herald Tribune The World's Daily Newspaper. Get home delivery.

Click Here for up 65% off





Advertiser Links

Tiny, Wireless Video Camera Kit ONLY $79.99!

Get $100 from Citibank. Details.

Save on Broadway Shows! Get TicketWatch

RELATED ARTICLES
. THE SUPREME COURT: THE DEMONSTRATORS; Thousands of Students Gather Outside Court in Support of Admission Policies  (April 2, 2003)  $
. THE SUPREME COURT: AFFIRMATIVE ACTION; Justices Look for Nuance in Race-Preference Case  (April 2, 2003)  $
. THE SUPREME COURT; Excerpts From Arguments Before the Supreme Court on Affirmative Action  (April 2, 2003)  $
. National Briefing | Washington: Affirmative Action Case On Tape  (March 28, 2003) 
. U. of Michigan Draws A New Type of Recruit  (February 21, 2003)  $
Find more results for Affirmative Action and University of Michigan .

TOP WASHINGTON ARTICLES
. Bush Offers Pakistan Aid, but No F-16's
. Enron Is Barred From Selling Electricity and Gas in U.S.
. Senate Rebuffs Bid to Close a Gap in Medicare Drug Coverage
. Low-Income Child Tax Credit Must Wait, Republicans Say
. Shuttle Board Determines Likely Site of Fatal Damage