Polemics & Exchanges

On Michigan

The article by former Michigan state representative Greg Kaza concerning the effect of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in the University of Michigan race-preference cases (“Michigan’s Race Factor,” Vital Signs, October) is dreadfully misleading.  Kaza would have us believe that an important victory in the struggle against race-based preferences had been won.

Quite the opposite is true.  The decisions in the two Michigan cases make the situation much worse.  Justice O’Connor’s opinion, representing the majority view, allows the substitution of easily abused subjective judgments for what had been flagrantly discriminatory (but objective) standards favoring “underrepresented” minorities.  Professor Carl Cohen had published unchallenged proof that Michigan has, in the past, lied to conceal its unconstitutional admissions policies.  Under the new standards, the university will find it simple to conceal its admissions sins.  Further, the diversity argument offered by the university is only an expedient and unsupported opinion.

I suggest that your readers contact Mr. Terry Pell, director of the Center for Individual Rights, to get a full and objective view of the implications of the Supreme Court’s position.


Join now to access the full article and gain access to other exclusive features.

Get Started

Already a member? Sign in here