The College Fix

Jennifer Gratz, a civil rights activist and prominent critic of racial preferences in college admissions, writes about a crucial upcoming Supreme Court decision:

In 2006, Michigan voters overwhelmingly passed the Michigan Civil Rights Initiative… Even though the MCRI passed with a margin of 58 to 42, the radical group By Any Means Necessary (BAMN) immediately filed to have it overturned in court…

BAMN insists that the amendment is unconstitutional under the Equal Protection Clause because the legal impact of banning race preferences falls wholly upon, and thus targets, certain powerless minorities. Here, the foundation of their argument is that preferences are in fact maintained not for society as a whole but for the benefit of specific minorities.

Supporters of race preferences now have conflicting arguments. They’ve argued before the Supreme Court that race preferences are primarily for the benefit of everyone. But in the fall they will argue in front of the same court that race preferences are primarily for the benefit of minorities. It would be impossible for the Court to accept that logic without undermining the legal basis for affirmative action.