The Michigan Civil Rights Initiative, more commonly known as Proposal 2, will be re-addressed by the U.S. Supreme Court by the fall.
According to a news release from the American Civil Liberties Union, the Supreme Court will hear arguments in the case that will consider eliminating the amendment, citing that Prop 2 is unconstitutional because it blocks pupils from pushing colleges to consider race as a factor during admissions.
Initially, Prop 2 aimed at halting favored treatment of minorities—whether it concerned race, color, sex or religion—in obtaining admission for employment, publicly financed associations and colleges or universities.
Prop 2 was a ballot initiative that passed into Michigan Constitutional law Nov. 7, 2006. According to official results from the Michigan Secretary of State, the results stood at 58 percent in favor of the proposal, and 42 percent against. Prop 2 became law on Dec. 2, 2006.
The press release said in November 2012, a 15-judge board struck down the amendment. The panel clarified that a state law like Prop 2 encroaches upon the Equal Protection Clause when it comes to governmental decision making, especially where the issue of race is being measured.
Attorney Mark Fancher of the ACLU of Michigan Racial Justice Project said in the press release, “Our government should not be forced to, based on race, cherry-pick who has a voice at the decision making table. We look forward to presenting these arguments to the U.S. Supreme Court and are hopeful that the Court will allow the decision to stand.”
ACLU’s Director of Racial Justice Program, Dennis Parker, said Prop 2 is unfair and it discriminates against minorities, but the amendment doesn’t discriminate against those who want to seek higher education if they are athletes or propose any other factors or accomplishments, the release said.
EMU sophomore and biology major Thomas Quinn said universities should keep considering race as
a factor, with one reason being there may be a possible bias within the administration.
“Who knows what the head of the department really thinks?” Quinn said. “I just feel, to keep the university fair, they should keep it.”
EMU sophomore and physical education major Mandy Ambs disagreed.
“I don’t think it’s really fair that some races can get into college cheaper than other races,” Ambs said. “I think it’s fair that it’s based on home income, but race? That doesn’t make any sense to me.”
EMU senior and journalism major Wade Hooks said race shouldn’t play a part at all.
“It should be according to the level of the person,” Hooks said. “Unfortunately, history has shown
where certain people have been downplayed and disadvantaged, but I think nowadays it should be according to your ability and your level of intelligence.”
For more information regarding the case and to read related legal documents, go to www.aclu.org/racial-justice/cantrell-v-granholm.
