From the issue dated June 6, 2003
|
|
|
American Indians Seek a Voice in Affirmative-Action DebateBy WILL POTTERAmerican Indian students have generally been on the periphery of the debate over affirmative action in college admissions, mainly because of their small numbers. But the
Critics of affirmative action argue that American Indians are such a small segment of the nation's population -- less than 1 percent -- that the court's decisions in two cases involving the University of Michigan at Ann Arbor will not affect them as much as other minority groups. American Indian organizations say the opposite: Because of their small population, none of the widely discussed alternatives to race-conscious admissions policies will ensure them sufficient access to the nation's selective colleges. Not Helped by Percentage Plans They are especially skeptical when it comes to "percentage plans," which
"If you listen to the talk of percent plans, they always talk of African-American and Hispanic students," says Colette Routel, a lawyer who helped prepare the supporting brief filed with the court on behalf of American Indian tribes. "They leave out native students. There's a reason for that: The plans can't be successful with Native American students." Percent plans can only increase diversity if high schools are segregated, she says. "But you only have one or two native students at most high schools. In 48 of the 50 states, you won't even have that." Even in high schools near Indian reservations, many graduates go on to tribal colleges. American Indian groups have couched their support for affirmative action in many of the same terms used by black and Hispanic groups: an emphasis on diversity and its importance to individual students, higher education, and minority groups. For example, a brief filed by the New Mexico Indian Bar Association and two other bar associations argues that affirmative action is crucial to serving a "compelling and constitutionally valid interest in assuring competent legal services for underserved populations." But some of the chief arguments being made for race-conscious admissions policies do not easily apply to American Indians. Because American Indians account for only one-sixth of 1 percent of Michigan's residents, for example, they are unlikely to benefit from the university's professed goal of maintaining "critical masses" of certain minorities on its campuses. And some of the justifications for affirmative action being put forth by American Indians are entirely their own. There are more than 500 federally recognized American Indian tribes in the United States, plus another 200 that are petitioning for recognition. Each has its own government and court system. A brief filed on behalf of 11 Michigan tribes argues that without affirmative action, the tribes "would be unable to fill important governmental positions with qualified candidates." This would violate the "federal government's policy of self-determination for all Indian tribes." The brief also argues that Michigan has a unique legal obligation to American Indians. In 1817, several tribes provided a land grant of 4,000 acres to the University of Michigan in the Treaty of Fort Meigs. The grant, "given for the express purpose of educating Native American children," formed a large portion of the university's original endowment. Other colleges have similar historical obligations -- Harvard University's charter called for the "education of English and Indian youth" -- but lawyers say that only Michigan has much chance of defending affirmative action on those grounds, because the treaties of other states are worded too generally. Preferences for Tribes The argument seems to have sparked some interest in the Supreme Court. During oral arguments in the Michigan cases, the only mention of American Indians was when Justice John Paul Stevens asked Kirk O. Kolbo, the lawyer for the white plaintiffs, if the treaty was constitutionally sound. "I don't believe so, Your Honor," Mr. Kolbo said. "Again, it's a distinction drawn on the basis of race." If the court rules against race-conscious admissions policies, lawyers for American Indian groups say they will argue that colleges can legally give preference to students registered in federally recognized tribes. A 1974 Supreme Court decision, Morton v. Mancari, held that American Indians are the "proper subject for separate legislation" in regards to employment preferences. That strategy will be a last resort, says Allie Greenleaf Maldonado, the tribal lawyer for the Little Traverse Bay Band of Odawa Indians. There are strict requirements on tribal membership. For example, the Navajo tribe grants membership only to individuals who have a Navajo mother, even if both parents are American Indian. "There are tribes that have been waiting for federal recognition for 20 years," Ms. Maldonado says. "Then there are people like me who fought for 10 years for a piece of paper to prove I'm Native American. We don't want it to come to that." http://chronicle.com Section: Government & Politics Volume 49, Issue 39, Page A22
| |||||||||||||||||||||||
Copyright © 2003 by The Chronicle of Higher Education