by Phil Kent

As appeared in Atlanta Journal & Constitution, January 22, 2003

Despite its benign name, most government-sponsored affirmative action programs are nothing more than institutionalized racism.

In fact, the U.S. Supreme Court will soon hear an appeal from two challenges to the admissions practices at the University of Michigan. Legal scholars - and a supportive Bush administration - are watching in anticipation that the high court will end the practice of admitting students to colleges and universities based on their skin color rather than their educational qualifications.

The high court - finally - is poised once and for all to end the shameful regime of racial quotas. In the case of the University of Michigan's admissions policy, 20 points are automatically granted to a minority applicant. By comparison, a perfect SAT score garners only 12 points.

A recent decision from the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Georgia ending the University of Georgia's race-based admissions program sheds light on how the Supreme Court may approach the Michigan appeal.

U.S. District Court Judge B. Avant Edenfield flatly stated that UGA's "amorphous, unquantifiable" goal of diversity did not provide a compelling state interest for using racial preferences. Last year, the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals' three-judge panel unanimously upheld Edenfield in favor of three white female plaintiffs who were turned away from UGA (and subsequently admitted).

UGA President Michael Adams, a strong advocate of "diversity," received an interesting lecture from the three federal judges on what the real definition of that word means. "If the goal in creating a diverse student body is to develop a university community where students are exposed to persons of different cultures, outlooks and experiences, a white applicant in some circumstances may make a greater contribution than a non-white applicant," the judges underscored.

Interestingly, many college admissions directors had already been traveling down this proper, legal road. Stanford University's dean of admissions notes that there are white students in his applicant pool each year who are categorized internally as "diversity students." They include "kids from rural backgrounds, kids from Appalachia, and kids who are white and recent immigrants."

UGA says it has moved to a system that considers all the qualities of the applicants without regard to race.

Government-sponsored discrimination was wrong 40 years ago, and it is just as wrong today when a government entity determines benefits based on race. Real people, like the Michigan plaintiffs, are harmed in real ways by racial quotas. The Supreme Court, I hope, will soon underscore that point.

For More Information Contact:
Media Relations
media@southeasternlegal.org
(404) 365-8500