Living in a post-affirmative action world; ruling against Michigan could boost minority achievement, says one scholar. But others are not so optimistic - Ruling On Affirmative Action - University of Michigan

Black Issues in Higher Education, Feb 27, 2003 by Ronald Roach

Even though the U.S. Supreme Court has yet to role on the constitutionality of the University of Michigan's undergraduate and law school admissions plans, Americans already are living in a post-affirmative action world, opines futurist and academic administrator Nat Irvin II.

With increasing racial diversity on the rise in American society, the goal of having a diverse work force has represented a high priority for many corporate, education and political leaders, says Irvin, an assistant dean for MBA student development at Wake Forest University's Babcock School of Management. People have to come to grips with the notion that race-conscious affirmative action, an important mechanism by which underrepresented minorities have attained meaningful representation at elite college campuses, isn't going to last forever, he notes.

"I'm optimistic. I think a decision against the University of Michigan will have a positive impact in the long run," he says.

Irvin says his optimism stems from the belief that a ruling against Michigan will spur Black and Latino families to become more competitive in the way they will seek out and use educational opportunities for their children. A boost in academic competitiveness among Black and Latino students can only enhance their life chances, particularly given that changes in the global economy are demanding a highly educated work force in the United States, Irvin says.

Others are not so optimistic.

"Ending affirmative action will only add to increased racial straggle and tension," says Dr. Robert G. Newby, a sociologist at Central Michigan University.

"What they're doing is re-legitimizing all-White institutions of higher education," he says of the efforts by affirmative action opponents.

In Newby's perspective, African Americans already are widely committed to the goal of academic achievement. And while some families may interpret a ruling against the University of Michigan as a message to beef up their focus on academics, such a decision will do more to fuel greater divisions between Blacks and Whites than to promote mutual respect and understanding.

"I think it's one of those issues where Blacks see it one way, and Whites see it in another," says Dawn D. Bennett-Alexander, an associate professor of employment law and legal studies in the Terry College of Business at the University of Georgia, who supports the University of Michigan's plan.

The fear commonly expressed by higher education observers and officials is that the numbers of Black and Latino students at elite institutions will fall dramatically as they did immediately after the use of race in higher education admissions was banned in California and in Texas

in 1995 and 1996. Though the Black and Latino student numbers recovered to a degree in those states because of efforts to admit students from a wider variety of high schools, the current belief is that without a program to address diversity, Black and Latino admissions in elite institutions will fall and remain low for quite some time.

"I fear that a ruling against the University of Michigan will bring about the re-segregation of higher education at elite institutions," says Cedric M. Powell, associate dean for academic affairs and professor of law at the University of Louisville in Kentucky.

ENDORSING RACIAL DIVERSITY, PERCENTAGE PLANS

Over the years, affirmative action advocates have supported the use of race-conscious affirmative action because it has been seen as a necessary tool to level the playing field for underrepresented minorities who most often have to compete against highly privileged Whites and Asian Americans. After three decades of race-conscious affirmative action, the push for race-conscious policies enjoys wide support across American higher education. The American Council on Education (ACE), which represents 1,800 colleges and universities, reports that 38 leading higher education associations, including ACE, were signatories to a recent letter urging President Bush to side with the University of Michigan's affirmative action programs.

Although President Bush announced his opposition to the University of Michigan's affirmative action plans, he endorsed the idea that racial diversity represented a desirable objective on higher education campuses. "I strongly support diversity of all kinds, including racial diversity in higher education. But the method used by the University of Michigan to achieve this important goal is fundamentally flawed," President Bush declared on Jan. 15.

This endorsement naturally has angered conservatives who have argued that racial diversity is not a "compelling interest" justifying any remedy whether it be race-neutral or not. Many scholars, however, believe that even if the Supreme Court strikes down the Michigan plans, the court will likely say something positive about racial diversity, thus encouraging states to adopt percentage and other race-neutral plans, such as class-based affirmative action.

"The Supreme Court will likely say you can do something with race, but it can't be as explicit as what Michigan has done," says Jonathan L. Entin, a professor of law and political science at Case Western Reserve University School of Law.