Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Legal Commentary Blogs -> Discriminations

Legal Commentary

: Discriminations

The Sad State Of Pro-Preference Argument

A good example of the sad state of pro-preference argument can be found in this public conversation between Prof. Kevin Gaines, the director of the Center for African and African American Studies at the University of Michigan, and Byron Maxey, a U-M junior. (HatTip to reader Mike McFall)

[Prof. Gaines] said at a press briefing today that Proposal 2 made students of color feel unwanted on campus. U-M junior Bryon Maxey, a plaintiff in the case, agreed.

?If I were to go to another school, there would be a better chance for a supportive environment and a critical mass of students I can identify with,? said Maxey, who is considering U-M for graduate school.

I?m not sure any institution should want to attract any students who do not feel ?wanted? unless they are given preferential treatment, or regret losing any students who resent being treated equally, i.e., without regard to their race.

As for Mr. Maxey, Prop. 2 did nothing to reduce his freedom to choose to apply only to schools that discriminate on the basis of race, i.e., that ensure the existence of a ?critical mass? of students that is presumed to provide the sort of ?supportive environment? Mr. Maxey wants.

But one thing that can be said in partial defense of the arguments stated by Prof. Gaines and Mr. Maxey is that they are no worse than the arguments of the Detroit Branch of the NAACP and the ACLU of Michigan whose lawyers

said today that the 2003 U.S. Supreme Court decision involving race and admissions at the University of Michigan made it clear that race and gender are among many factors that colleges may consider.

Yes, may. Not must. 58% of the voters of Michigan decided in 2006 to prohibit their institutions from doing what the Supreme Court, in its wisdom, said they ?may? do.

Full post as published by Discriminations on February 04, 2008 (boomark / email).