He suspects that NVCC's involvement is "sufficiently private to where it doesn't violate the law." But if questions arise, NVCC must be prepared to show a "compelling state interest" for its involvement, such as remedying past discrimination or diversity, Roach said.

In Maryland, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th circuit rejected the university's argument that its publicly funded scholarship helped remedy Maryland's history of discrimination. So most states are looking for other compelling state interests, he said.

The federal 5th circuit ruling in the Hopwood v. State of Texas held that diversity is no longer a compelling state interest, pointed out Richard Weitzner, an assistant attorney general for Maryland. Even though Hopwood, which applied to admissions practices at the University of Texas Law School, did not address scholarships, it sets the tone for how race-targeted policies are handled, he said.

But the federal government in 1994 issued guidance that reaffirmed diversity as a compelling goal for an institution, Weitzner said. The issue is, "how do you know when you've reached an adequate level of diversity?" Weitzner added that the answer depends on how OCR sees it.

In his filing, Thompson questioned whether he will get an objective response from OCR. "Now, I know it is the unofficial policy of the Department of Educations Civil Rights staff, where possible, not to support white (deleted word) claims of discrimination.... Nevertheless, I submit this complaint aware that I am not to receive due process under the law due to your liberal political allegiances and desire to allow (NVCC) to continue to give out these racist scholarships."

COPYRIGHT 1996 Cox, Matthews & Associates