Grutter or Otherwise: Racial Preferences and Higher Education

By Alexander, Larry; Schwarzschild, Maimon | Constitutional Commentary, Spring 2004 | Go to article overview
Save to active project

Grutter or Otherwise: Racial Preferences and Higher Education


Alexander, Larry, Schwarzschild, Maimon, Constitutional Commentary


The Supreme Court decisions on affirmative action have arrived. (1) They are dubious as constitutional law, bringing to mind what John Hart Ely said of Roe v. Wade: "it is not constitutional law and gives almost no sense of an obligation to try to be." (2) Yet because the cases were about whether affirmative action is permissible, not whether it is required, the salient question--now more than ever--is whether preferential affirmative action is a good thing. At least in higher education, we will suggest, there is overwhelming reason to think it is not.

The outcome of the Supreme Court cases should perhaps have been no surprise. The set-up was perfect for Justice O'Connor, who has made something of a career of being the Court's swing voter, and who has a penchant for opinions that split unsplittable babies. (3) The University of Michigan's two racial preference admissions schemes--the undergraduate school's crude "20 points if you're a minority," (4) and the law school's allegedly holistic "how does each person contribute to an educationally-enriching diverse student body?" (5)--were perfect for O'Connor's rejection of transparent racial goals and endorsement of disingenuous ones. (6) As is fairly widely recognized, the law school's scheme is dishonest because it is not what it is billed to be, namely, a holistic, individual assessment of applicants, conducted with an eye to the quality of the educational environment: rather, it is like the undergraduate system, a plan that is about meeting goals for racial representation. Educational benefits are doubtful and, in fact, largely window dressing driven by language in Justice Powell's opinion in Bakke (7). As for the "holistic" individual assessments, they always seem to produce something very close to a particular percentage of particular minorities. Nor is there ever any question of ensuring "critical masses" of, say, farm children, Appalachians, evangelical Christians, or ex-businessmen/businesswomen, all of whom might contribute to legal education as much as or more than people identified by their race. Justice O'Connor presumably knows all this, although she pretended not to.

The finding that Michigan's interest in maintaining an elite law school is a compelling interest sufficient to justify a racial classification is utterly inconsistent with the Court's suspect-classification/compelling-interest jurisprudence now extending back over many decades. Are the "means"--racial preferences-really "necessary" to ensure that the law school will be of elite quality? In California there are several public law schools, generally conceded to be among the most elite in the country, which are forbidden by the state constitution to indulge in racial preferences. As for "diversity" as a "compelling interest," imagine a state government's plan to "diversify" some heavily minority branch of state government by giving preferences to whites. Does anyone believe Justice O'Connor would uphold those? (8)

The compelling interest test for racial classifications is dead--at least in this case.

What Justice O'Connor's opinion amounts to is that if universities can disguise their admissions systems so that it is not too blindingly obvious that they are pursuing racial representation for its own sake, they can get away with it, although they are admonished that using race as a criterion is a dirty business and that they should try their hardest to eliminate it by, say, 2028. If "strict scrutiny" of racial classifications has to be diluted or denatured in order to uphold the plan, then so be it, although the Court will claim not to be doing so. And after all, perhaps diversity is a compelling interest. Look at all the amicus briefs from corporate America saying that it is. (9)

Whether or not the Supreme Court should have held racial preferences by the government to be unconstitutional, what seems clear to us is that the culture of racial preferences in higher education has proved very bad as a matter of policy.

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

Grutter or Otherwise: Racial Preferences and Higher Education
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

While we understand printed pages are helpful to our users, this limitation is necessary to help protect our publishers' copyrighted material and prevent its unlawful distribution. We are sorry for any inconvenience.
Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.