CONGRESSMAN GREGORY W. MEEKS STATEMENT ON THE GRUTTER & GRATZ DECISION

Washington, DCCongressman Gregory W. Meeks (D-NY) of the Sixth Congressional District released the following statement today on the Grutter & Gratz decision, Yesterday the Supreme Court in the 5 to 4 ruling (Grutter v Bollinger) issued a landmark decision upholding the University of Michigan Law Schools admission policy aimed at enhancing the racial diversity of it student body. By a 6 to 3 vote (Gratz v Bollinger), the Court rejected the University of Michigans undergraduate admissions program which assigned bonus points automatically to African American, Latino, and Native American applicants.

I do not regard yesterdays decision as half a dozen of one and six of the other, but as a clear victory for affirmative action in university admissions. I have two reasons for saying this. First, the University of Michigan can refashion its undergraduate admissions policy similar to its Law School admission policy. Second, virtually none of the opponents of affirmative action who have dragged the country down the divisive path of perpetual lawsuits, referenda, demagogic rhetoric, are claiming the Courts ruling as a victory. Indeed, as one of the intellectual architects of the anti-affirmative action movement exclaimed, Its over. . . . Im in a complete meltdown.

Why do the opponents of affirmative action feel this way? Because finally, after a generation of uncertainty on the part of supporters of affirmative action as to what is constitutionally permissible and certainty on the part of opponents of affirmative action that any and all efforts to diversify higher education are constitutionally impermissible in a color-blind society, the nations highest court has come down on the side of flexible efforts to achieve racial inclusion. It has said that such efforts may take race into account as a determining factor but not the determining factor.

Indeed, to the surprise of many including this member of Congress the court went further. It declared that while affirmative action admissions programs must be narrowly tailored, holistic, and focused on individuals, racial diversity is in fact a compelling state interest.

As Justice Sandra Day OConnor, writing for the majority, put it: In order to cultivate a set of leaders with legitimacy in the eyes of the citizenry, it is necessary that the path to leadership be visibly open to talented and qualified individuals of every race and ethnicity.

Thats the whole point one that the opponents of racial equality are working overtime to obscure. Without achieving inclusion in the nations institutions of higher education, particularly its elite professional schools, it is virtually impossible to create a leadership in government, business, the military, the professions, the media, and the arts that corresponds more or less to the diversity of America. Failure to do this not only undermines national unity, but also Americas role in the global community. The fact is, leaders in business, labor organizations, military officials, educators, legal scholars, and other prominent Americans from all walks of life, indeed, according to polls, the broader public understand this, was confirmed in the wide range of amicus briefs filed in support of the University of Michigan.

Sadly, the most prominent American, President George W. Bush, did not. He sided with Grutter and Gratz and the usual anti-affirmative action block on the Court: Justices Rehnquist, Scalia, Kennedy, and Thomas. The Bush Administration had asked the Court to overturn both programs. Fortunately, the Court rejected the Bush Administrations argument that so-called race neutral programs like the top 10 percent admission rule in Texas work better than a race conscious program. It is instructive that most of the approaches that the Administration favors depend their success on segregated high schools.

For the first time ever five Justices Stevens, Souter, Ginsburg, Breyer, in addition to OConnor have affirmed former Justice Lewis Powells position in the 1978 Bakke decision that race may be used a plus factor in university admissions. In fact, the majority broaden Powells concept by saying that the flexible use of numbers to ensure a critical mass of diversity is also permissible. This places affirmative action on a firmer footing than ever and gives colleges and universities across the nation a clearer road map for constructing constitutionally permissible diversity programs.

As always, the most decisive question is, where do we go from here? I urge my congressional colleagues, leaders of the nations colleges and universities, the business associations, corporate executives, military and governmental officials, scholars, civil rights organizations, and tens of thousands of students across the country to advocate in support of the University of Michigan; to take the lead in building a national consensus in support of the Supreme Courts ruling in Grutter v Bollinger. I also urge President Bush to accept the Courts judgment and forego waging a guerilla war of non-compliance and non-enforcement against the majoritys decision. I likewise urge Mr. Bush to nominate and the U.S. Senate to confirm for the federal judiciary, including the Supreme Court should a vacancy occur, only justices who will enhance the national unity embedded in Grutter v Bollinger.