Coalition asserts right to intervene

Following a month of motions and legal debate, Detroit Federal Judge Patrick Duggan can now decide the fate of a coalition asking to become defendants in the first of two lawsuits challenging the University's use of race as a factor in the admissions process.

Citizens for Affirmative Action's Preservation, a coalition composed of 17 Michigan high school students, local attorneys and national organizations, filed a motion this past Wednesday asserting its right to intervene in the lawsuit.

CAAP's reply motion responded to briefs filed by the University and the Center for Individual Rights about two weeks ago.

"The main point of the reply is that we don't agree with CIR that we should be kept out," said Chris Hansen, ACLU senior staff counsel. The ACLU joined with two other national organizations - NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund and the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund - to lead the coalition.

The reply asserts CAAP's timely, legal interest in the lawsuit, as well as counter pointing other arguments CIR made in its response motion to CAAP's intervention.

Godfrey Dillard, CAAP spokesperson, said Duggan has two options when ruling on whether to allow the intervention. Duggan can either make a ruling based on all of the briefs filed by the three parties or he can hold a hearing to allow oral argument to decide the ruling, Dillard said.

"We feel that we have answered the response of the CIR and we are cautiously optimistic that the judge will rule in our favor," Dillard said.

When and how Duggan will rule is unknown.

"Essentially, he could do that any time he wants," Hansen said, adding that the decision could come anytime from now to September.

The related filings began when members of the coalition filed a motion to intervene in the lawsuit Feb. 5. If the intervention is permitted, the coalition will have the same status in the case as both the University and CIR.

CIR, a Washington D.C.-based law firm, filed the lawsuit Oct. 14 against the University on behalf of two white applicants who claimed they were unfairly evaluated in the College of Literature, Science and the Arts' admissions process because race was used as a factor. The two applicants argue that while they were denied admission, less qualified minority students were admitted to the University.

In its response motion, the University did not oppose CAAP's intervention.

"We feel that we clearly meet the requirements of a substantial legal interest in the case," Dillard said. "If this law is stricken down, these students will be affected."

But Terry Pell, CIR senior legal counsel, said this is not the case.

"Under the 6th Circuit case, they have to show a legally protectable interest, and they do not in this case," Pell said.

In addition to showing legal interest in the lawsuit, the coalition must demonstrate that its interests are not already adequately represented by the University.

"Clearly, we have a fair substantial right to defend race and race conscious rights," Dillard said.

Dillard said that although CAAP also will defend the University's use of race as a factor in the admissions process, it has a different stake in the lawsuit than the University.

"What we are doing is defending certain constitutional principles," Dillard said. "We're defending the 14th Amendment."

Pell said it is premature to say the University will not fully represent the coalition's defense. The University has maintained that it will vigorously defend its admissions policies, he said.

Lisa Baker, associate vice president for University relations, said she did not want to comment on CAAP's reply motion.

03-09-98