High court lets admissions ruling stand High court lets admissions ruling stand
UT hopes to one day restore affirmative action
05/30/2001
By Christy Hoppe
The Dallas Morning News
AUSTIN--University of Texas officials are hopeful that a decision by the U.S. Supreme Court to let stand a decision allowing the University of Washington law school to use affirmative action may eventually mean UT can do the same. But experts say the issue is far from settled, and there's no telling how UT and other universities will eventually be affected.
Both state universities have been arguing that their goal of a diversified student body should allow them to use race as a factor in admission policies. Michael Rosman, general counsel for the Center for Individual Rights, which has been part of the legal team that sued both universities, said little meaning could be attached to the Supreme Court's refusal to hear a case.
In the UT case, named for plaintiff Cheryl Hopwood, four law school applicants sued in 1992, contending that as white students, they faced unconstitutional discrimination from admission standards that were weighted to favor minorities. The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals determined the standards were improper and in 1996 effectively ended the use of affirmative action in admissions, scholarships, hiring and financial aid programs at all state colleges and universities.
Similarly, at the University of Washington, three white students alleged that they were denied their right to equal protection because they had to meet more rigorous standards than minority applicants. That case was decided by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which differed from the 5th Circuit by holding that public institutions could use race as a factor in admissions.
The 9th Circuit cited the Supreme Court's landmark Bakke decision, which held that quotas were unconstitutional but that affirmative action could be used to remedy historical discrimination. On Tuesday, the Supreme Court decided not to hear the Washington appeal, allowing the 9th Circuit decision to stand.
Mr. Rosman said the court could have determined the case was not a good test because of a Washington state voters' referendum in 1998, which banned affirmative action and caused the university to abandon the disputed admissions policy. One scenario could be that the court "is just not interested in deciding this issue, and that wouldn't bode well for Texas' petition" for the high court to hear the Hopwood case, Mr. Rosman said.
Patricia Ohlendorf, UT's vice president for legal affairs, said that if the Supreme Court's refusal to hear the Washington case indicates anything, it is probably positive for UT. The Hopwood case has been submitted to the Supreme Court, which could decide whether to hear it as early as next month.
"It could be a good sign for us that the court agreed with the 9th Circuit opinion, or it could be a good sign for us if the court decided to take our case rather than this one," Ms. Ohlendorf said. UT law professor Douglas Laycock, who is part of the UT legal team, said the high court's decision was difficult to interpret. "Probably it just means that the Washington case wasn't a very good case for their purposes," Mr. Laycock said, citing the Washington referendum that made affirmative action illegal.
"Whether they'll like our case any better, we'll just have to wait and see," he said. Also working their way up to the high court are racial preference cases out of the University of Michigan and the University of Georgia
Online at: http://www.dallasnews.com/texas_southwest/380390_hopwood_30tex..html
© 2001 DallasNews.com
News and Announcements | AAD Home Page