Judges deny interventions

Detroit courts last week denied the motions of two coalitions of students seeking intervention in the two lawsuits challenging the University's use of race in its admissions policy.

In a ruling handed down last Monday, U.S. District Judge Bernard Friedman denied the motion of 41 students to become co-defendants in the lawsuit challenging the University's Law School. The request was filed on March 26 to enter the second lawsuit against the Law School. Their petition was backed by United for Equality and Affirmative Action, Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action and Law Students for Affirmative Action.

"We did not oppose the motion to intervene," said University spokesperson Julie Peterson.

Tuesday, U.S. District Judge Patrick Duggan denied a similar motion to intervene from 17 high school students. The motion was filed in February by several groups, including the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, the American Civil Liberties Union, the Mexican American Legal Defense Fund and Citizens for Affirmative Action's Preservation. The motion targeted the lawsuit against the use of race as a factor in the admissions policy of the College of Literature, Science and the Arts.

Both coalitions were attempting to help defend the University's practice of affirmative action.

Miranda Massie, an attorney for the Law School coalition, said she will appeal the judge's decision.

"I was surprised by the decision," Massie said.

Massie described the coalition of students as having "a tremendous personal stake in affirmative action. A much greater stake than any University can have."

Drawing attention to past discrimination, gender issues and the validity of the LSAT scores was one of the coalition's objectives, Massie said.

"I am absolutely certain the University will inadequately represent the interests of the students," Massie said. "The University of Michigan is notorious in this region for its wretched record in racism in particular but also on sexism."

University President Lee Bollinger said the school did not oppose the interventions, and that the University's defense team would adequately defend its practices.

"We took a general neutral position on this case," Bollinger said. "My belief is the University will fully defend the policy. (The University) will make the constitutional argument as effective as it can be made."

Godfrey Dillard, an attorney representing the high school student coalition, said the judge's decision was not unexpected because of the courts' increasingly conservative stances.

"The traditional court was a refuge for the oppressed. Now, courts are moving away from that role," Dillard said. "We see retrenchment on a board range."

Dillard said the coalition is in the process of meeting to decide whether to appeal Duggan's decision. Dillard added that attacks on affirmative action are occurring not only in the courts but in education and business.

LSA senior Jessica Curtin, one of students seeking to intervene, described the judge's decision as outrageous.

"Our futures are being decided over our heads," Curtin said.

07-13-98