Last December, a federal judge rejected a challenge to the University of Michigan's undergraduate admissions policy, ruling that race could be a determining factor in admissions. But Tuesday, U.S. District Court judge Bernard Friedman made the opposite ruling regarding the similarly race-conscious admissions standards of the unversity law school, declaring its admission system "unconstitutional."
That opinion was, by legal standards, a bizarre contradiction. It is almost unheard-of for two decisions — rendered just three months apart and dealing with essentially the same issue — to yield such a surprising split. And the nuances of the schools' policies only made the judges' respective decisions more surprising. Where the undergraduate policy is explicit, the law school guidelines are far more subtle. Both, however, represent an attempt on the part of the University of Michigan to address the complexities of race, academic standards and diversity.
Friedman's opinion was straightforward: "All racial distinctions are inherently suspect and presumptively invalid." Equally straightforward were the retorts from University of Michigan officials. In a statement released Tuesday, university president Lee Bollinger declared, "Today's decision conflicts with settled Supreme Court law and the policies of virtually every selective university in the country for nearly 30 years. We will appeal this decision." The administration fervently defends the university's affirmative action policies, declaring that "racial diversity is critical to a high-quality education," and pointing out that many traditional factors (i.e., standardized tests, on which non-Asian minorities tend to score lower than white students) do not accurately judge a student's abilities.
Those who agreed publicly Wednesday with Friedman's decision were eager to applaud what they called academia's reaching "a point where race is no longer an issue." Friedman's detractors painted a less rosy picture; some predicted his opinion would return American campuses to lily-white canvases of homogeneity.
Appeals are under way in both cases; legal experts predict at least one of the opposing federal court rulings will come under the scrutiny of the U.S. Supreme Court, where the Justices will return to the explosive issue after a long hiatus. The Court has not examined affirmative action in higher education since 1978, when it ruled the University of California's admissions committee could use race as one of many determining factors.