The U.S. Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals has upheld the earlier ruling that the Michigan Civil Rights Initiative is unconstitutional.
On Nov. 16 a 15-judge panel ruled 8-7 to uphold the Sixth Circuit’s previous three judge, 2-1 decision from July 1, 2011.
Michigan’s Attorney General Bill Schuette has declared his intention to appeal the case to the U.S. Supreme Court.
“Entrance to our great universities must be based upon merit,” Schuette said in a press release. “We are prepared to take the fight for equality, fairness and the rule of law to the U.S. Supreme Court.”
The American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan called the court’s most recent decision “a victory for equality” in a press release issued immediately after the decision was made.
“This is about allowing all individuals to have a voice in the admissions process,” Director of the National ACLU Racial Justice Program Dennis Parker said in a press release. “The full appeals court has recognized that racial identity cannot be meaningless or irrelevant in our admissions process.”
“Today’s landmark decision reaffirms the cornerstone principle of our democracy; that the political process must be open to all Americans,” said Mark Rosenbaum, University of Michigan professor and ACLU attorney who argued the case. “It restores the argument that race is not to be disadvantaged when universities seek to enroll a diverse student body.”
The Michigan Civil Rights Initiative, also known as Proposal 2, was a 2006 state ballot initiative in Michigan. It passed by a 58 percent to 42 percent margin and became Section 26 of Article I of Michigan’s Constitution.
The proposal’s intended purpose was to prevent discrimination and preferential treatment based on race, sex, color, ethnicity or national origin from being a factor in determining who would be admitted to a publicly funded school, college or university, as well as who would be hired or contracted to work in or for state or local government.
“MCRI embodies the fundamental premise of what America is all about: equal opportunity under the law,” Schuette said.
Lawsuits were filed against the MCRI in 2006 by a number of groups, including the ACLU and the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People.
“This is not about leveling the playing field; it’s about getting on the playing field,” Parker said.
MCRI’s opponents argue that by not permitting public colleges and universities to make race a consideration during the admission process results in fewer minorities being admitted to those schools.
“Since Proposal 2 went into effect, the University of Michigan reports that the number of African-Americans enrolled as freshmen declined nearly 15 percent from 2006 to 2010,” said the ACLU of Michigan in a recent press release.
When the enrollment figures for 2006 and 2010 are compared, there was a decline in the percentage of African-American students. In 2006, African-Americans made up 6 percent of the incoming freshmen.
In 2010, they made up 4.5 percent of the incoming freshman, a decrease of 1.5 percent. The percentage remained at 4.5 percent for both 2011 and 2012.
The nearly 15 percent number referred to by the ACLU of Michigan comes from comparing the actual number of new African-American freshmen for each year: There were 330 in 2006 and 283 in 2010, a decline of roughly 15 percent. The statistics they presented do not seem to take into account the entire number of freshmen admitted for each year.
However, this also does not mention that in 2008 the percentage of African-Americans actually increased to 6.7 percent of all freshmen, although this has been the only year so far to have such an increase.
The percentage of minorities in freshman admissions did initially decline at U of M, although the past two years have seen an upswing in the percentage of minorities in freshman admissions, and some public universities, including Eastern Michigan University, have even seen yearly increases in the percentage of incoming freshmen that identify as minorities since 2006. It is possible that MCRI has hurt minorities, but further research would be needed to make an accurate determination.
EMU students expressed a variety of opinions on the subject.
Neal Stafford, a sophomore majoring in psychology, expressed his support for the court’s decision.
“It gives minorities the opportunity to go to college, that they otherwise would not have,” Stafford said.
Julia Niswender, a junior studying communications and film studies, disagreed.
“I think it’s wrong,” Niswender said. “Everyone should be treated equal, and getting rid of it doesn’t seem fair.”
Phillisha Smith, a junior double majoring in electronic media and political science, expressed similar sentiments.
“It would be counteractive for an institution to base employment or acceptance on race because we all have the opportunity to show our selves academically, and the point of this law is to even the playing field and not have race be a factor,” she said.
Smith also echoed Schuette’s opinion of MCRI.
“I don’t feel it’s discrimination if they don’t take race into account, and at the end of the day we all have the opportunity to prove ourselves academically,” she said.
Juniors Adrienne Ayers, who’s studying electronic media and social work, and Justin Smith, a criminal justice major, also expressed their support for MCRI.
“I think we should keep it, so minorities can stand on their own two feet, and so we can know what we’re really capable of,” Smith said.
“I’m for affirmative action, but I do believe that it should be in place,” Ayers said. “Racism still exists, it should stay in place just because of that. I do feel that the playing field for whites and non-whites has been leveled, but racism still exists. If there’s a white student who’s scores are better, than they should be the one to get admitted. If you haven’t earned it, you haven’t earned it.”
Nick Van Brunt, a senior majoring in sociology, was not satisfied with either side.
“The whole system needs to be redone,” Van Brunt said. “You can argue it either way. I mean minorities were oppressed for years.
They need to find a way to help them advance and improve themselves, but at the same time, if I work hard too I shouldn’t be denied admission to U of M just because of some quota or something.”
EMU President Susan Martin said in a statement, “We are currently reviewing the decision of the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals and will make decisions regarding its impact on the university when that review is complete. Diversity is a defining aspect of what makes the student experience meaningful and special at Eastern. It is one of our core values. Both racial and economic diversity help make Eastern a richer place. We embrace our identity as a school of opportunity.”
The MCRI will remain in effect as law while the appeal process continues. If the U.S. Supreme Court decides it is constitutional, it will remain in effect; otherwise the law will be thrown out at the end of the appeal process.
