After supporters of affirmative action scored a major victory
with a Supreme Court ruling in Michigan, opponents of racial
consideration are mobilizing to counter the potential effects of
the ruling ““ a movement that may be led in part by University
of California Regent Ward Connerly.
Connerly will travel to Michigan this week as chairman of
the American Civil Rights Coalition, an organization that opposes
racial consideration and classification, to determine if a measure
similar to California’s Proposition 209 can be moved onto the
Michigan ballot in the near future.
Proposition 209 prohibits the consideration of race in state
hiring and contracting, including UC admissions. The measure has
largely nullified any practical effects of the Michigan ruling in
California.
Dianne Schachterle, a spokeswoman for the coalition, called the
Michigan trip a “feasibility study” that Connerly
decided to undertake when it became clear to him that there was a
base of local support for an initiative like Proposition 209.
“We have been flooded with e-mails and phone calls from
Michigan residents asking that such an initiative be
started,” she said.
The study will include looking at the process of getting such an
initiative on the Michigan ballot and how much local support
exists.
“This is very exploratory at this point,”
Schachterle stressed.
Eugene Volokh, a law professor at UCLA, said state constitutions
are defined more by actions at the state level, such as a state
ballot initiative, than at the federal level, such as a Supreme
Court decision.
“It is common for a state constitution to impose more
restraints on the state government than the federal constitution
does,” he said.
Schachterle added that residents of other states have contacted
the ACRC to express their interest in the feasibility study,
although she declined to name the states or say how many.
Michigan became the focal point for affirmative action
supporters and opponents alike after the Supreme Court upheld the
admittance criteria of the University of Michigan law school on
June 24 ““ admittance criteria that took race into
account.
Along with the ruling, the Court also struck down a point-based
system used for the school’s undergraduate admissions that
gave what many called an automatic boost to minority students.
Proponents of affirmative action said the law school decision
upholds the core value of racial consideration.
Connerly argued that the Michigan decision does not set a
precedent for other states to follow.
“The Court may have allowed racial preferences with their
decision, but they did not mandate them. The people still rule in
this country, not robed justices. If the people want
color-blindness and equality under the law, all they have to do is
stand up and say so,” he said in a statement released by the
ACRC.
Connerly’s feasibility study in Michigan coincides with
another campaign in California, where he is pushing the
Classification by Race, Ethnicity, Color, or National Origin
initiative, which would restrict the state’s ability to
gather information on a person’s race.
Proponents of CRECNO, also known as the racial privacy
initiative, argue that the initiative will help society become more
colorblind. Opponents say the initiative will cripple race-based
research and hurt diversity in state institutions.
Janelle Orsi, the Southern California regional organizer for By
Any Means Necessary, a nationwide affirmative action advocacy
group, said any move to put a Proposition 209-like initiative on
the Michigan ballot would likely be met by vehement opposition from
local pro-affirmative action groups that mobilized before the
Michigan decision and still remain strong in the area.
If the ACRC does manage to get such an initiative passed in
Michigan, it would negate the effects of the Supreme Court ruling
and prohibit the University of Michigan’s law school from
using its current admittance criteria.
Volokh cautioned that, despite the Supreme Court ruling, the
success or failure of affirmative action in Michigan is ultimately
dependent on the electorate.
“It is certainly the case that throughout the country
there are a lot of people who oppose racial preferences,”
Volokh said.
“Whether a majority of Michigan voters takes that view and
whether there are enough Michigan voters who are willing to go
through the work to put it on the ballot, remains to be
seen,” he added.
Schachterle also stressed that Connerly is acting as
chairman of the organization and not as a UC regent.