July 27, 2007

State Official Upholds Race-Conscious Admissions at U. of Wisconsin

Wisconsin’s attorney general has issued an informal legal opinion to state legislators concluding that a race-conscious freshman-admissions policy adopted by the University of Wisconsin’s Board of Regents for the entire university system does not conflict with a state law intended to prevent the system’s campuses from engaging in discrimination.

Soon after the board adopted the policy, in February, 15 state representatives and four state senators sent Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen a letter challenging the legality of the policy, which calls for system campuses to consider race and ethnicity as part of a comprehensive review of applicants. Specifically, their letter alleged that the new policy conflicted with a 1973 law prohibiting the system from making admissions decisions using “sectarian or partisan tests or any tests based upon race, religion, national origin of U.S. citizens, or sex.”

A separate letter, signed by another group of lawmakers, urged Mr. Van Hollen to uphold the policy as legal. They argued that it did not impose any “test,” as described in the 1973 law, and called it “thoughtfully and carefully written to allow admissions officials the flexibility they need to select the student body necessary to ensure the continued success of the institution.”

In the legal opinion, Mr. Van Hollen said the term “test” in the 1973 law was used to refer to an admissions standard that would disqualify any applicants who did not meet it. Because the system’s new admissions policy calls for campuses to consider race as just one of many factors in weighing applicants, it does not impose the sort of racial “test” that the 1973 law prohibits, he said.

Mr. Van Hollen’s letter contained a note of caution for the university system, however, saying that it must make sure applicants are considered as individuals, as required by the U.S. Supreme Court in its key rulings dealing with race-conscious admissions. —Peter Schmidt

Comments

1. Race-conscious freshman-admissions policy adopted by the University of Wisconsin’s Board of Regents for the entire university system does conflict with a state law intended to prevent the system’s campuses from engaging in discrimination. Race should not be taken as a factor in admitting students to the university. This is nothing but racial discrimination.

   — Kan Chandras    Jul 27, 05:34 PM    #

2. In other words, Atty Gen Van Hollen has decided that “considering” race is not a “test” because it only excludes some students on the basis of race (those students who would have been admitted if they had been of another race), not all students of any race.

   I wonder how many applicants would have to be excluded because of their race in order for “consideration” to be regarded as, in practice, a “test.”

   — John Rosenberg    Jul 28, 04:01 AM    #

3. Van Hollen’s take that the 1973 law was, “thoughtfully and carefully written to allow admissions officials the flexibility they need to select the student body necessary to ensure the continued success of the institution” is an outright lie. The law was clearly designed to prohibit disqualifying students based on race (even if they are white or Asian). Sadly, too many politicians see the need to perpetuate racial preferences by conjecturing that prior laws were written with the current zeal for “diversity” in mind. Ironically, he states thinks that the continued success of the institution rests not with its ability to enroll the best students, but the ones who will help the schools meet its diversity goals.

   — Lloyd Hansen    Jul 30, 08:57 AM    #

4. The Wisconsin Attorney General is to be commended for his courage in upholding the US Supreme Court’s ruling in Grutter v. Bollinger in spite of pressure by those who have enjoyed the privileges of race and economic status for many generations. Affirmative action prevents discrimination, it does not cause it. Affirmative action also levels the playing field and neutralizes the effect of privileges by virtue of one’s economic status, access to quality schools, etc. Tests that are touted as indicators of preparedness to succeed in college are now acknowledged to have a disparate impact on members of minority groups and are not as predictive as other factors including grades.
   —

   Shirley J. Wilcher
   Executive Director
   American Association for
   Affirmative Action

   — SJ Wilcher    Jul 30, 10:28 AM    #

5. Miss Wilcher (#4 comment) writes: “Affirmative action prevents discrimination, it does not cause it.” Wrong! Affirmative action IS discrimination.

   Giving preference in college admissions and/or hiring on the basis of immutable characteristics is not only outright discrimination, but would make the crafters of the American Constitution turn over in their graves.

   First, it is undeniable that if one gives preferences to some, one takes away from others. To make matters worse, if this granting of preferences is done on the basis of characteristics that are literally “aquired by accident of birth”, the unjust and discriminatory nature of this practice is evident. Preferences are merely the flip side of discrimination.

   Secondly, this white-guilt-driven practice stands in stark opposition to the US Constitution, which bestows rights on the individual only, not on groups or classes of people.

   Lastly, and most importantly, “affirmative action” has increasingly come to be viewed by minority members as pejorative and patronizing — and rightfully so. After all, the message to the recipient of “affirmative action” is loud and clear: you need “extra points” because you don’t measure up. How insulting!

   — Sylvia Wasson    Jul 30, 04:49 PM    #

6. Much applause for this decision. Republicans in the state legislature have been criticizing, poking at, and cutting funds from the university system for years, gleefully disregarding the fact that our university system is one of our state’s last remaining economic assets and should be preserved rather than dismantled – and obviously forgetting where many of they themselves got their law educations. I hope that Wisconsin will never turn into another Boise State, where, in the year 2007, a black football player and white cheerleader are forced to hire security for their wedding in response to multiple violent threats from hateful racist individuals. It’s not so far off, Wisconsin. Consider events like this and tell me racism is not alive and well in this country, even subconsciously in the minds of our leaders and decision-makers – and admissions officers. It is a sad state of affairs. Racial minorities need higher educations to improve their lives and communities and must not be overlooked because they were born into a world of oppressive and historically rooted white Christian male dominance.

   — J. Zschernitz    Jul 31, 12:32 AM    #

Previous: Education Department Releases Annual Statistical Digest
Next: Student-Aid Program in Texas Finds Money to Keep Helping Some Students