 |
 |
NEW SUIT SEEKS TO DULL PROP 2 EFFECT; JUDGE OK'S DELAY Voter approval of Proposal 2006-2, barring the use of most race- and gender-based affirmative action programs by public entities, cannot override the constitutional right of universities to take race and gender into account when establishing the make-up of their student bodies, a new lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court in Detroit on Tuesday contends. The new lawsuit was assigned to U.S. District Judge David Lawson, who earlier in the day approved an agreement by the state and the state's three largest universities to delay the implementation of Proposal 2 until no later than July 1. http://www.aclumich.org/FinalComplaint.pdf The NAACP and ACLU, representing students, faculty and applicants, said in its new case that Proposal 2 cannot undercut the right of universities, most recently established in a 2003 U.S. Supreme Court decision regarding UM admissions policies, to consider race and gender as one factor in their admissions process. The suit alleges the new language does not ban programs that use race or gender in the admissions process, and in fact argued that such an interpretation would "place an unconstitutional burden on the ability of protected groups to advance their interests and rights while leaving others, such as legatees, athletes, and veterans, free to advance theirs without any similar burdens." Those are similar to new arguments submitted by the group By Any Means Necessary in a revised complaint filed Monday in its lawsuit that brought the Proposal 2 controversy to the federal court. "Affirmative Action is still the law of the land," said Wendell Anthony, president of the Detroit chapter of the NAACP. "We have come too far to allow the doors of opportunity to be shut in the face of the American promise of liberty and justice." And ACLU Executive Director Kary Moss said, "We are pleased to be able to represent current students and faculty, as well as prospective students, in a case that will be the first to evaluate exactly what Proposal 2 means in this state." The lead plaintiff in the case is U-M student Chase Cantrell, an African-American who said he selected the Ann Arbor campus because it was "so much more dynamic" than the Cornell Law School where he had also been accepted. The order (USDC docket No. 15024) issued by Mr. Lawson to delay implementation of the new constitutional language means the University of Michigan, Michigan State University and Wayne State University may complete their current admissions and financial aid process under their existing policies giving additional weight to applicants who are from racial minority groups or are women. The new amendment was to have gone into effect Saturday, a date that will still apply to other public entities that must end their preference-based programs. Attorney General Mike Cox said in a statement that the stipulated agreement to delay implementation of the amendment as it applies to universities "upholds Proposal 2 and the will of the people." In exchange for winning a delay in adhering to the new ban on affirmative action programs, the universities agreed to drop their cross-claim in the lawsuit challenging the amendment as violating the U.S. Constitution, and to not file other constitutional claims against the proposal. But Alan Foutz of the Pacific Legal Foundation, which sought to enter the case on Monday, said the agreement does not prevent the universities from filing a later challenge against Proposal 2. Governor Jennifer Granholm, a defendant in the case, was also a party to the agreed delay. She said the state is continuing to review the implications of the amendment as it applies to government. "Clearly we are committed to diversity," she said. George Washington, an attorney for the group By Any Means Necessary that initiated the court challenge, said the agreement to delay its application to universities was "a good first step toward undoing Proposal 2." Meanwhile, the city of Lansing filing a motion to obtain a delay similar to the one given universities in order to have the amendment go into effect when the city's fiscal year begins July 1. It argues it has contractual commitments and hiring procedures that cannot be quickly abandoned. Mayor Virg Bernero said, "Like the state universities, we need time to evaluate our hiring and procurement processes and to make whatever adjustments are needed to comply with the law." But he also said he is committed to continuing to do everything possible to "uphold the principles of inclusion and equality."