High Court Affirmative Action Case Today

The trouble lies in the automatic preference given race in Michigans "point system" evaluation process where minority students are given 20 points on a 150 point scale merely for being minorities. This penalizes a non-minority student with the exact same credentials and qualifications for not being of a specific race. This student is being discriminated against for reasons beyond that students control, which is the crux of this issue.

Ah, but even if a certain effect is desirable, should the constitution framework be altered in order to achieve it? The question here is methodology and what cost such methods might have that might make it disproportionate to its' benefit. Matters that find their way to the Supreme Court are of such a nature. Not every solution to a problem should reflect constitutional modification. There are such things as worse solutions to bad problems.

I think you will find that those of us who were not even considered a whole person at writing and ratification of the Constitution are much more likely to see it as growing and developing document. I believe you are right the Supreme Court is exactly the place for this argument because it should be determined if the law, as reflected in the "living" Constitution finds that diversity is of such importance that we should protect its use in society.

We have had AA regulations for about 35 years, we have had racial discrimination, disproportionately against African Americans for centuries, before we decide that we have done enough to address this pesky problem of racism let's look at that fact.

Affirmative Action does not close the door on white Americans, it give room in the doorway for non-whites. If that keeps whites from getting the whole of the pie, that is okay, the problem is a mentallity that says you are due the whole pie in the first place. How would white America have faired had the legislatinos decided that the redress for centuries of discrimination is not allowing whites access to jobs, schools, lending, etc. that we were routinely excluded from. That is real balancing. That wouldn't have been right and it wasn't what we did, what legislatures did was say for those who have had no access we will assure certain access for a few to hopefully allow them to bring along their brethern. I think this has worked well. Blacks are becoming entrepeneurs, architects, heads of major corporations, and other successes that even in my early lifetime were considered unattainable. If we continue to have opportunities to enter the system in significant numbers Affirmative Action will be an unnecessary relic. But 35 years versus centureies, I think most would agree, it hasn't been given a fair shot as yet.

Cassandra

Just a note from someone in graduating from college in three weeks. I need to get this off my chest. After reading a Washington Post Op-Ed I am mad, mad, mad! The article said " Jennifer was kept out of U of M because she was white, and that is unjust"

First, and foremost we will never know what combination of attributes this woman had when she applied to law school it's never even been discussed! All we know is she had good grades and a high LSAT. Well, newsflash! EVERYONE that applies to U Of M law school has good grades and high LSAT scores. Think about it. People who apply to Harvard are exceptional otherwise they wouldn't bother. This is the case at virtually every elite academic institution in the United States, at the basic ( numbers game) level candidates are virtually the same. They all performed well in their environment, and did relatively well on their tests. So what these schools do is start looking for things that make them unique, and things that will make the school an interesting and dynamic place. yes i'm talking preferences: legacy, athlete, tuba player, South Dakotan, first generation college student, Apalachian farmer's daughter, etc. Affirmative action opponents point to race in these programs because they are convinced that Blacks and Latinos are academically inferior and a 2 point LSAT score proves merit beyond a shadow of a doubt. When in truth someone who worked full time, grew up in a poor neighboorhood, has been discriminated against, and still managed to pull down a 3.3, will bring a strong work ethic, a greater depth of experience, as well as intelligence to a law school than say a rich caucasian kid who could afford to spend every moment in his room studying and probably could afford test prep classes to boot!

Furthermore, Universities are in the business of preparing students for the real world. The real world is a diverse place, and if interaction with people different from you does not happen you are not going to be prepared for your career. (This is why I believe there were so many friend of the court briefs supporting U of M from huge corporations, and the military)

The affirmative action opponents would have you believe that a Black person with decent grades can pretty much go to school wherever they want, at the expense of hardworking more intelligent white people. As a Black woman , graduating from Vanderbilt I can assure you this is not true. I am attending a top 20 university. I had excellent credentials. Staight A's, prestigious high school, AP classes, community service, leadership positions and I still got REJECTED from 6 of the 12 schools I applied to including Northwestern, Wellesley, and Yale. I didn't cry that a Native American somewhere in North America got preference over me and I was robbed, I accepted that only so many people can go to Yale. And Yale wants all different kind of people. I still ended up at a great school, as most people with good credentials do regardless of race.

Which is why I just don't buy this whole AA is stealing from whites positions in organizations. Wall Street isn't teeming with Blacks, and women, and Latinos. Elite colleges are still overwhelmingly white, upperclass bastions. The truth is more work has to be done, and denying race as a factor means we deny the importance of the issue in working towards a more equal society.