Looking Ahead
The day after the release of the NAS report, a federal appeals court stayed a federal district judge's order that the University of Michigan law school quit using race as a factor in admissions. A three-judge panel of the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals concluded that the order by U.S. District Judge Bernard Friedman was disrupting the selection of the incoming law school class.
Friedman, in late March, had struck down the law school's affirmative action policy, declaring that the state had no compelling interests in a diverse student body. He later denied the university's request to stay the decision pending its appeal. The 6th Circuit Court of Appeals reversed Friedman's denial of the stay.
While Friedman's ruling runs contrary to that of his colleague Duggan, who affirmed the argument in the Gratz undergraduate case that campus racial diversity produces educational benefits, the cases are proceeding along legal tracks where the diversity argument for affirmative action is likely to remain a factor in ongoing appeals. NAS officials are hoping their research leads to a reassessment of the idea that racial diversity has positive benefits for higher education.
Wood, who is well-known as a co-author of the Proposition 209 referendum, which upon passage ended race-conscious affirmative action in California, not only believes that a new reading of the CIRP diversity research should be considered in the Michigan lawsuits, but that higher education leadership in America should address the question of diversity's impact.
"I think an interesting and lively debate will result. We'd welcome it," Wood says.
© Copyright 2005 by DiverseEducation.com
