(THEME)
VOICE ONE:
Legal experts call it America’s most important debate onaffirmative action in twenty-five years. Colleges and universitiessay they have a right to consider race when they choose students.The Supreme Court will decide. I’m Steve Ember.
VOICE TWO:
And I’m Phoebe Zimmermann, with the VOA Special English programTHIS IS AMERICA.
(CROWD NOISE)
On April first, thousands of demonstrators marched outside theSupreme Court building in Washington, D.C. They came from as faraway as California. Most came to support affirmative action. Blackstudents and others shouted and waved signs. They called on thenation’s highest court to keep affirmative action programs in place.
(SOUND FROM COURTROOM)
Inside the court, the nine justices heard arguments in two casesbrought by white students against the University of Michigan.
VOICE ONE:
“Affirmative action” is the name for programs to help members ofminority groups and women in education and employment. Opponents sayit puts race and ethnicity ahead of ability. They call that unfair.If that is true, supporters answer, then so is special treatmentgiven to children of the wealthy and politically connected.
Colleges and universities throughout the country have programs tohelp black, Hispanic and Native American students get admitted. Butpressure has grown to end such programs especially at schools thatreceive public money.
Whites who oppose affirmative action say it unfairly reducestheir chances to attend the nation’s most competitive schools. Theysay admissions policies should be race-neutral.
Minorities and others say affirmative action helps balance astudent population. This diversity, they say, creates a betterlearning environment for all students. They say studies have shownthat if such programs are banned, colleges would accept fewerminorities.
Critics say diversity has not been shown to provide aneducational benefit to students. In any case, they say diversity isnot an interest required of government.
(MUSIC)
VOICE TWO:
The cases before the Supreme Court started innineteen-ninety-seven. Three white students brought two separateactions against the University of Michigan. Jennifer Gratz andPatrick Hamacher had been denied admission to the undergraduateprogram two years earlier. Barbara Grutter was rejected by theMichigan law school. They investigated, and found that AfricanAmericans and other minorities were admitted with lower scores thanwhites.
They argued that this violated the Fourteenth Amendment to theConstitution and the Civil Rights Act of nineteen-sixty-four. TheFourteenth Amendment guarantees equal treatment under the law. TheCivil Rights Act says organizations that get federal money cannotmake decisions based on a person’s race. Both these laws had beenwritten mainly to help black people seek fair treatment.
VOICE ONE:
The University of Michigan does not deny that it uses race amongother considerations when it chooses students. The policy at theuniversity and its law school gives extra credit to minoritystudents. It gives twenty points out of the university’sone-hundred-fifty point system to African-Americans, Hispanics orNative Americans. Points are also awarded to all students based onwhere they live, as well as their athletic ability, test scores andgrades.
The university says academic performance gets the most points.But critics say race is the most decisive measure of all.
For two hours on April first, the nine Supreme Court justicesheard legal arguments in these two cases. They aggressivelyquestioned the lawyers for the university and for the white studentsdenied admission. They also heard from the top lawyer for the Bushadministration. The administration has intervened to oppose theMichigan program.
President Bush calls it a quota system based on race. Thepresident says there are better methods to gain diversity in highereducation. Californians voted in nineteen-ninety-six to endaffirmative action in state government, including education. Publicsystems in California, Texas and Florida currently admit studentswho are in the top percentages of their high school classes. Buteven this method has its critics.
(MUSIC)
VOICE TWO:
Affirmative action in the United States grew out of the civilrights movement of the nineteen-sixties. Such programs are designedto guarantee that minority groups and women can compete equally withwhites and men. Civil rights leaders say affirmative action hashelped minorities and women enter colleges and get good jobs theywould likely have been denied in the past.
Some programs seek to remove barriers so that all people maycompete equally. Others have been designed to guarantee that anestablished number of women and minorities are chosen for jobs or aplace in school. Designers of such programs have to be careful,though. In nineteen-seventy-eight, the Supreme Court bannedestablishing quotas in affirmative action programs. The court ruledin what was known as the Bakke case.
VOICE ONE:
Allan Bakke, a white man, wanted to attend medical school at theUniversity of California at Davis. He was rejected twice. But theschool had accepted minority students with lower scores. A quotasystem saved sixteen spaces for minorities out of a total ofone-hundred students admitted.
Allan Bakke said judging him based on his race violated theConstitution. The Supreme Court agreed. It ruled that colleges couldconsider race in admissions. But it said race could not be the onlyconsideration.
VOICE TWO:
The Bakke case, however, split the Supreme Court five-to-four.Since then, the justices have been divided in their opinions inother affirmative action cases. But since Bakke the court has notrevisited the issue of school admissions.
Michigan says its programs do not violate Bakke because they donot use quotas.
The limits established in the Bakke case were meant to guaranteethat providing greater chances for minorities did the least possibleharm to others. But the case did little to settle the issue ofaffirmative action. The debate has only intensified over the pasttwenty-five years.
(MUSIC)
VOICE ONE:
Observers of the Supreme Court have been trying to guess how thejustices will rule in the Michigan cases. Four members areconsidered most likely to vote against the university. That is basedon past conservative decisions. The four are Chief Justice WilliamRehnquist and Justices Antonin Scalia, Anthony Kennedy and ClarenceThomas.
Four justices with records of more liberal opinions areconsidered most likely to support the university. These four areJohn Paul Stevens, David Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and StephenBreyer.
If this guesswork is correct, then Justice Sandra Day O’Connorwould have the fifth and deciding vote. Her vote has decided pastrace-related cases. Justice O’Connor has taken positions in thepolitical center. She generally has rejected policies that treatraces differently. But she also has not been willing to end themcompletely.
VOICE TWO:
Before the arguments on April first, the court received hundredsof documents from businesses, politicians and military officials.These groups urged the court not to end affirmative action.
During the hearing, a majority of the nine justices did expressconcerns about ending affirmative action. They talked about whatcould happen if fewer minorities receive higher education. It couldeven affect the nation’s defense, if the military has fewercollege-educated minorities to become officers.
Justice O’Connor noted that most affirmative action programsapproved by the court in the past were for set periods of time.Several other justices suggested that the University of Michigan useother methods to establish racial balance. Justices Scalia andThomas suggested that Michigan might even avoid the need foraffirmative action if it lowered its admissions standards.
VOICE ONE:
What the Supreme Court decides could affect the future ofaffirmative action policies nationwide. The decision is expected inJune.
(THEME)
Our program was written and produced by Cynthia Kirk. I’m SteveEmber.
VOICE TWO:
And I’m Phoebe Zimmermann. Join us next week for another reportabout life in the United States on the VOA Special English programTHIS IS AMERICA.