Lawsuit targets 'U'

LSA admissions under fire

The law firm that won the precedent-setting Hopwood affirmative action case in Texas filed a class-action lawsuit yesterday against the University's undergraduate admissions policies.

The lawsuit was filed against the University's College of Literature, Science and Arts, University President Lee Bollinger and former President James Duderstadt.

Jennifer Gratz, who was rejected from the University in 1995, and Patrick Hamacher, an unsuccessful 1996 applicant, are named as the two plaintiffs in the suit, which was filed at the federal District Court in Detroit yesterday. The lawsuit claims that because the two are white, they were treated "less favorably in considering their applications for admission to the LSA college."

"Race should never be a factor," Hamacher said in an interview with The Michigan Daily.

"I will not deny the fact that we have used race as a factor," Director of Undergraduate Admissions Ted Spencer said yesterday. "We want a variety of students representing diverse areas. We've always felt that race was important."

Hamacher contacted the office of state Rep. Deborah Whyman (R-Canton) after he read a newspaper article about the University's affirmative action programs. Whyman, along with three other state representatives, referred him and hundreds of other students interested in filing a lawsuit to the Center for Individual Rights, a Washington D.C.-based law firm that is a leader in fighting affirmative action.

The plaintiffs claim that the University's admissions policies violate the 14th Amendment and the Civil Rights Act of 1964. University admissions standards allow race to be one of the deciding factors for admittance, CIR contends.

Hamacher said he was upset that minorities with lower qualifications gained acceptance to the University. With a GPA slightly under 3.4 and an ACT score of 28, Hamacher claims he was qualified for admission to the University.

"I had seen other kids getting in, and they had much lower credentials than me," said Hamacher, who is currently a student at Michigan State University.

Gratz, who attended high school in Southgate and graduated with a 3.765 GPA and an ACT score of 25, said she hopes the lawsuit will change an admissions system that she believes is flawed.

"I felt like there was a wrongdoing," Gratz said. "The policies need to be changed so nobody has to go through what I went through."

Terry Pell, a CIR spokesperson, said the lawsuit against the University has the potential of setting a precedent similar to the Hopwood case.

"The admissions system here is more egregious than the Hopwood case," Pell said.

Pell said he hopes the suit will move along in court "expeditiously."

Whyman said she hopes this case will eliminate any preferential treatment received by minorities.

"This is a big day for us, the people who are fighting discrimination," Whyman said. "We have good plaintiffs who were selected because they have outstanding cases. You want to have the strongest plaintiffs possible for this type of suit."

Under the case of Bakke vs. California, which is the 1978 Supreme Court ruling that set current precedent in the area of affirmative action, a university or college may use race as one of many factors in admission. CIR's current lawsuit, however, claims "race was one of the predominant factors (along with scores on standardized admissions tests and high school grades) used for determining admission."

The complaint states that Gratz and Hamacher suffered "humiliation, emotional distress, and pain and suffering" as a result of being rejected. The suit demands that the court award the students financial compensation, declare that the University's admissions policies violate the 14th Amendment and order the University to admit Hamacher as a transfer student.

The lawsuit states that Hamacher intends to transfer to the University from MSU "if the discriminatory admissions system described herein is eliminated."

Provost Nancy Cantor said the University is a prime target for a Hopwood-style lawsuit.

"We are a highly selective, large, public university that is committed to diversity," Cantor said.

The lawsuit, Cantor said, will not damage the University's academic reputation.

"We are known as a superb university that is committed to providing a quality education," Cantor said.

Because the University offers education to people from all classes and races, Duderstadt said it is a likely candidate for a lawsuit. During Duderstadt's presidency, the University created the Michigan Mandate, a policy to diversify the campus through minority recruitment and retention of students and faculty. Since the Mandate began, minority enrollment increased from 12.7 percent in 1986 to 25.4 percent in 1996.

"We are perhaps the most striking example of the Jeffersonian concept of an institution of higher education," Duderstadt said. "We are regarded as one of the leaders in higher education. Our success makes us a target."

Duderstadt said the University's admissions policies are not different from affirmative action programs at other universities.

"The particular mechanisms we use are not unlike those in other institutions," Duderstadt said. "Michigan has always been out front in its commitment to diversity."

In a meeting of the faculty's governing body Monday, Bollinger said that if the University loses a case that challenges its affirmative action programs, the administration does not have a back-up plan for its admissions programs. Bollinger said a back-up plan at such an early stage would be a sign of weakness.

"I think the administration is firmly committed to diversity," Bollinger said to the Senate Advisory Committee on University Affairs.

The University has retained the Washington D.C.-based law firm of Wilmer, Cutler, and Pickering to defend the University in the lawsuit. John Pickering, a partner in the firm, said he has not yet seen the lawsuit complaint.

In a written statement yesterday, Bollinger said diversity has always been one of the University's goals.

"Since its founding, the University of Michigan has been committed to providing an education to the widest range of students," Bollinger said. "Throughout our history, we have included students from diverse geographical, racial, ethnic and socio-economic backgrounds."

University Philosophy Prof. Carl Cohen is a vocal critic of affirmative action. In a 10-page report, Cohen found minorities were given greater preference in admissions.

"I know the motivation is honorable, but the device is unacceptabe," Cohen said, adding that he believes the University's admissions process violates the 14th Amendment. "We don't give people the equal protection of the law when we give preference on the basis of skin color."

For example, his study compared students with GPAs between 2.8 and 2.99 and SAT scores between 1100 and 1190 who applied to LSA in 1994. Eleven percent of the non-minority applicants were accepted, while all minority applicants in that category were granted admission.

Some students claim the University's affirmative action programs should be made stronger.

"The University still needs affirmative action," said RC sophomore Micha Holmquist. "The consequences of removing affirmative action would be horrendous. I would be in favor of additional efforts to recruit students from non-middle class backgrounds."

Other students, however, said the University's affirmative action policies must be examined by the court.

"I think that any time something is challenged, it is good," said LSA sophomore Steve Waterbrook. "The formula that they have is a blatantly unfair policy. The box you check has nothing to do with your performance."

Michigan Student Assembly Minority Affairs Commission Chair Kenneth Jones said the lawsuit is not valid.

"It's really important that we have programs to help ease the tension on these groups," Jones said. "The lawsuit is just political propoganda."

John Truscott, a spokesperson for Gov. John Engler, said Engler will not take a position on the lawsuit because Rep. David Jaye (R-Macomb), one of the lawmakers organizing the suit, is a candidate for the Republican nomination to a state Senate seat.

"We are not going to get involved or do anything to influence the primaries," Truscott said.

Although the state has laws that mandate equal opportunity, Truscott said they do not cover affirmative action policies.

"The University of Michigan has more progressive programs than the state," Truscott said. "Our constitution gives the universities' governing boards, so state laws do not affect them."

Jaye said the case will be successful in changing policy because he believes the affirmative action programs at the University are discriminatory.

"The U of M's minority preferences are so extreme that any Michigan resident would do well in court if they challenged the policies," Jaye said. "The U of M is so unfair, un-American and evil. This will be the great battle to eliminate affirmative action nationwide."

-Daily Staff Reporters Janet Adamy and Chris Metinko contributed to this report.

10-15-97