'U' prepares for next phase of lawsuits

Nearly one year ago, efforts to challenge the University's use of race in its admissions practices began as several state legislators spearheaded a call for Michigan residents who had applied to the University and thought they had been unfairly denied admission.

Since the legislators first sparked the issue, two lawsuits have been filed to test the University's admissions policies, igniting numerous campus debates and discussion about affirmative action and heightening campus activism. Now, people on all sides of the argument are poised for the next phase of the lawsuits.

"This has certainly been a very challenging year for all of us, but I think that we have so much at stake and we have to stay very clear about our priorities and our goals and we have to, I think, remember to respect each other's opinions and points of view," said Associate Vice President for University Relations Lisa Baker.

The Center for Individual Rights filed the first lawsuit against the University on Oct. 14, arguing that two white students were unfairly evaluated in the College of Literature, Science and the Arts' admissions process because race was used as a factor. They claim less qualified minority students were admitted into the University over them.

Similarly, in the second lawsuit CIR filed against the University on Dec. 3 - this time targeting the Law School - plaintiff Barbara Grutter's claims mirrored those of the plaintiffs in the first lawsuit.

During the past six months, the parties involved in the lawsuits have been busy exchanging motions, responding to the motions and reacting to attempted interventions from outside groups.

Baker said the University has incurred $818,000 in legal fees and expenses from outside legal counsel. In addition to utilizing internal legal expertise, the University has hired the law firms of Wilmer, Cutler and Pickering, which is based in Washington D.C., and Butzel, Long in Detroit.

"We were sued. This was brought against us," Baker said. "Now that we've been forced with these suits, we will defend them vigorously."

Both parties in the lawsuits are continuing to iron out their cases - a normal part of the discovery and pre-trial phases of lawsuits.

"It's completely routine," said CIR senior legal counsel Terry Pell said. "Nothing has happened yet to be pleased or displeased."

Pell also said the plaintiffs have not wavered from their positions.

"Nothing that we've seen so far deterred us from what we know at the beginning, that race is the predominant factor in the U of M's admissions process, and that is clearly unconstitutional," Pell said.

Pell said he does not think the two trials will begin until early 1999.

Although action from both sides of the lawsuits may calm down during the summer when the majority of students leave campus, many activists have promised that their efforts will not diminish.

Activists made their mark during the school year by motioning to intervene in both lawsuits.

On Feb. 5, a coalition of 17 Detroit-area high school students filed a motion to become a third party in the first lawsuit filed against LSA.

They received the backing of several national organizations known for fighting discrimination in the courts.

Rosa Abreu, an educational staff attorney for one of the national organization's - the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund - said minority high school students have a distinct interest in defending the University's affirmative action practices.

Abreu said minority high school students will be adversely affected if the plaintiffs succeed in removing race from the University's admissions process.

"We certainly hope that it will be allowed," she said.

"We certainly believe our claim for intervention is meritorious."

Just as in the lawsuit against LSA, a group of students filed a motion to intervene in the lawsuit against the Law School.

The multiracial group of students spans a wide range of educational levels.

"This case is of historic importance, both because it's quite likely to reach the Supreme Court and because even if it doesn't, it will mark a turn of the tide against efforts to resegregate higher education," said Miranda Massie, the lead attorney for the group of students.

Massie said the intervention also is of great importance to the this debate.

"The intervention is also of historic importance because all of the proposed interveners are prepared to fight the racist cynicism of anti-affirmative action proponents ...," Massie said.

As potential defendants, both intervening parties must show an interest in the lawsuits that cannot be adequately represented by the University.

Massie said interveners will be planning a national pro-affirmative action conference for sometime in the Fall.

Provost Nancy Cantor said it is the University's responsibility to provide students with a diverse atmosphere in which all perspectives are represented, and students have the opportunity to explore these viewpoints.

Cantor also said the affirmative action debate has become more narrow in the context of the lawsuits.

Members of the University community, she said, must remind themselves that all students on campus were chosen to attend the University and contribute to the diverse composition of this community.

"We should not question anyone who's here," Cantor said.

04-21-98