| DETROIT – The American Civil Liberties Union of
Michigan today applauded an appeals court decision
allowing public universities and public employers in
Michigan to continue to use affirmative action to ensure
a diverse student body and workforce. The 2-1 decision
strikes down a 2006 amendment to the state constitution,
which prohibited all affirmative action policies
including those previously upheld by the U.S. Supreme
Court.
“In a tremendous victory for equality, today’s ruling
has kept the door open for thousands of academically
qualified students of color to continue to pursue the
American dream through our state’s colleges and
universities,” said Kary L. Moss ACLU of Michigan
Executive Director. “Through this lawsuit, we set out to
level the playing field so that racial identity is not
treated as irrelevant or meaningless in this state.
Today we are one step closer to realizing that goal.”
The federal lawsuit was filed in 2006 on behalf of 18
students, faculty and applicants to the University of
Michigan by a coalition of civil rights organizations
that includes the ACLU of Michigan, Detroit Branch
NAACP, the New York law firm of Cravath Swaine and
Moore, NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund, Michigan
State Conference NAACP, and the national ACLU.
The coalition had asked the three-judge panel to
reverse a lower court’s decision and strike down
Proposal 2. The groups argued that the ban
unconstitutionally discriminates against students of
color by removing race from consideration in admissions,
while allowing the consideration of virtually all other
non-academic factors.
In its 59-page decision, the court agreed with the
coalition stating that Proposal 2 violates the Equal
Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution by creating a
double standard in university admissions that hurts
people of color.
According to the opinion: “Ensuring the fairness of
political processes, in particular, is essential,
because an electoral minority is by definition
disadvantaged in its attempts to pass legislation; and
‘discrete and insular minorities’ are especially so
given the unique hurdles they face. Ensuring a fair
political process is nowhere more important than in
education. Education is the bedrock of equal
opportunity.”
Since the passage of Proposal 2, published reports
from the University of Michigan have found that the
number of African-American, Hispanic and Native-American
students enrolled in the freshman class at the
university has declined by 11.4 percent. Many students,
according to the universities records, are choosing to
go elsewhere where public and private institutions are
not banned from offering aid based on race, ethnicity or
gender.
"Today's ruling helps us all to move forward in our
efforts to fulfill the promise of equal education that
the Court set in motion nearly 50 years ago,” said Mark
Rosenbaum, American Civil Liberties Union attorney and
University of Michigan professor who argued the case.
This was the second major lawsuit addressing
affirmative action at public universities in Michigan.
In the first, Grutter v. Bollinger and Gratz v.
Bollinger, the U.S. Supreme Court held that it is
constitutionally permissible for universities to
consider race and gender as one factor among many in
university admissions. Moreover, the Supreme Court has
explained that a state law violates the Equal Protection
Clause when it makes it more difficult for certain
racial minorities than for other members of the
community to achieve legislation that is in their
interest.
To read the appeals court decision, go to http://www.aclumich.org/sites/default/files/Cantrell%20%282%29.pdf
To read the civil rights organization's appeals court
brief, go to http://aclumich.org/sites/default/files/file/Cantrell%20Opening%20Brief%20-%20Final.pdf
To read the district court judge's opinion, go to
http://aclumich.org/sites/default/files/file/pdf/prop2opinion.pdf
To read the executive summary, go to http://www.aclumich.org/issues/racial-justice/2008-02/1250
To read the complaint, go to http://aclumich.org/sites/default/files/file/pdf/cantrallamendedcomplaint.pdf
|
