Supreme Court upholds diversity in admissions

Academe, Sep/Oct 2003

In a victory for affirmative action in higher education, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in June that consideration of race in college admissions is constitutional, provided that its ultimate goal is a diverse student body and that race is not the single determining factor in a student's admission. In upholding the University of Michigan law school's admissions policy in Grutter v. Bollinger, a 5 to 4 majority stressed that race can be used in "a flexible and nonmechanical way" in admissions decisions.

In an important statement for academic freedom, Justice Sandra Day O'Connor wrote for the majority that "the law school's educational judgment that . . . diversity is essential to its educational mission is one to which we defer," and that the Michigan law school's program is constitutional because it "engages in a highly individualized, holistic review of each applicant's file, giving serious consideration to all the ways an applicant might contribute to a diverse educational environment."

At the same time, in Gratz v. Bollinger, the Court struck down the University of Michigan's undergraduate admissions policy, finding its automatic award of 20 points on a 150-point scale for any minority applicant to be too mechanical. In a 6 to 3 decision, the Court found the undergraduate policy unconstitutional because it is not narrowly tailored to the state's interest in creating a diverse student body.

The AAUP has actively supported affirmative action since the 1970s, when it filed a friend-of-the-court brief before the Supreme Court in Regents of the University of California v. Bakke. The Court's current findings are a real victory for affirmative action, says AAUP associate counsel Ann Springer. At the same time, she expresses some concern at the ruling striking down Michigan's undergraduate admissions policy. "In these times of shrinking budgets," she notes, "the Court's requirement of a 'highly individualized, holistic review of each applicant's file' may present a significant burden to many schools, especially public institutions. The challenge for coming years," she concludes, "will be for institutions to develop review procedures that are both practicable and able to meet the Court's standard." Springer analyzes the two decisions in "Affirming Diversity at Michigan" on pages 54-58.