The University and the Center for Individual Rights have nearly one more week to respond to a coalition's motion to intervene in the first of two lawsuits challenging the University's admissions processes.
A clerk in the office of Detroit Federal Court Judge Patrick Duggan, the judge who will decide whether to permit the intervention, said no response motions have been filed yet.
The coalition, Citizens for Affirmative Action's Preservation, filed a motion in Detroit Federal Court on Feb. 5 to become a defendant in the lawsuit. Members of the coalition, including several national civil rights organizations and high school students from southeast Michigan, said they want to intervene in the suit because they have a direct stake in defending the University's admissions polices.
CIR filed the first lawsuit against the University in October on behalf of two white applicants who claim they were unfairly evaluated in the admissions processes of the College of Literature, Science and Arts because it uses race as factor in evaluating applicants.
Although representatives from the University and CIR said they could not comment about the matter, members of the coalition and several legal experts speculated on the two parties' responses.
"Our sense is that the defense won't respond, but the plaintiffs will," said Olati Johnson, assistant counsel for the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund - one of the national organizations leading the coalition.
If the parties answer the lawsuit, said Robert Sedler, a constitutional law professor at Wayne State University, it is not likely the University will object to CAAP's motion to intervene in the lawsuit and it is not likely CIR will support the intervention.
"Typically in these cases, the party on whose side they seek to intervene would not object to the intervention," Sedler said.
To receive defendant status, the coalition must prove that it has a stake in the case that is not fully represented by the University.
Sedler said the plaintiffs, who are represented by CIR in this case, will typically object for various reasons. CIR might object on the basis that a third party would "clutter the case" or that the University adequately represents CAAP's arguments, Sedler said.
William Allen, dean of James Madison College at Michigan State University, said that although the two parties' responses might affect Duggan's decision, he has other considerations.
"The judge has his own reasons not to let people in very easily," Allen said.
Allen said Duggan will not want his decision to be appealed, so he must take into account the legal merit of an intervention, not simply what the University or CIR wants.
Rosa Abreu, an educational staff attorney for the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund - another organization leading the coalition - said the University's and CIR's response motions will state their legal arguments but will not determine whether the coalition has a legal right to intervene.
"We believe that we are entitled to this intervention as a right under the law," Abreu said. "Whether the University is supportive in our motion to intervene will not affect the court's legal analysis."
Johnson said that after next week's deadline to respond, the coalition will have five days to file a response.
Duggan may allow representatives from the coalition to speak before the court or simply file written arguments, she said.
02-19-98
| Previous Article | Next Article |
should be sent to: daily.letters@umich.edu | should be sent to: online.daily@umich.edu |