New York Defends U-michigan's Affirmative Action Policy

State Attorney General Spitzer today announced that New York and 21 other states are filing a brief today in the U.S. Supreme Court supporting the University of Michigan's right to create a diverse educational environment at its undergraduate and law schools by considering race and ethnicity as one of many factors in its admissions criteria.

"Each state operates a unique system of higher education with varying educational missions, applicant pools, histories and resources. The law must be flexible to allow a public university to employ an admission program that is suited to its educational goals, including maintaining diversity among the student body," Spitzer said.

In briefs filed today, the States urge the Supreme Court to hold that admissions programs like those used by the University of Michigan are constitutional. The states' core arguments are that:

Diversity in education is a compelling goal:

The States supporting the University of Michigan hold firm that diversity in education is crucial if students are to flourish in our increasingly heterogenous society. Like the vast majority of public colleges and universities, the States have found that exposure to a diverse student body is a powerful tool by which students come to understand and appreciate similarities and differences in life experience, to question previously unexamined assumptions and stereotypes, and to truly appreciate common ground.

States need flexibility in the operation of their public colleges and universities:

States each have different goals, needs and concerns, and have the expertise to make the complex educational judgments necessary to create a college admissions system that will fulfill their schools' missions and serve their students well. They are best placed to make these educational choices, and respect for the academic freedom and local control of our nations public institutions of higher education requires no less. There is no one right way to achieve the educational diversity valued by so many. It should therefore be left to each individual State to establish an admissions policy that best suits its needs, within the constitutional limits the Court has set forth to ensure equality under the law.

The University of Michigan Does Not Rely on Quotas:

At the University of Michigan, no seats are set aside for minority candidates, there are no minority admissions committees, and each applicant competes against every other for a place in the class. Race is considered only as one of the multitude of factors to select a diverse class from a pool of very qualified applicants. Race is considered in the same manner as other admissions criteria, such as socioeconomic status, athletic accomplishment, leadership potential, geographic origin, legacy status, and the ability to overcome hardship.

The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear arguments on the constitutionality of the University of Michigan's admissions policies in two cases, Grutter v. Bollinger (challenging Law School admissions) and Gratz v. Bollinger (challenging admissions at the College of Literature, Science & the Arts), on April 1st.

The multi-state brief will be available on the New York State Attorney General's website, www.ag.ny.gov.

Attachments: