Originally posted by: Shantanu
Actually the point system is not illegal. What is illegal is using race as the most important factor.
U-M could remedy this by simply reducing the number of points given to a minority, or adding a new category like "World Trade Center survivor - 25 points", and then race would no longer be "the most important factor". On this technicality, they would win if challenged in court.
Yes, I know. It's a toothless ruling.
I think "most important factor" is not the issue. It is whether it becomes the "overriding factor". The actual problem was that the application of the point system made race not just most important but overpowering, turning it into a quota system. Apparently otherwise qualified minority students gained admission regardless of other factors relevant to competing students and the results for past years, when examined, showed that minority enrollment always matched apparent goals. It was pretty transparent which is why the vote was 6-3.
On the bigger issue of whether Affirmative Action is incompatible with the 14th Amendment, the court seemed to narrowly affirm (in the ruling on the Law School) the view that, as long as it isn't a strict quota system, application of a wider criteria than test scores and past performance is acceptable to gain diversity. However, I would not suggest taking the 5-4 vote as indicative that the court is close to dumping Affirmative Action as a whole. My understanding is that the UM Law School policies, while less blatant than the undergraduate system, still were pretty heavy handed in insuring minority admission.
Affirmative Action is here to stay for organizations that are smart enough to apply it correctly and not take the easy way out. That means giving credit to minority applicants who demonstrate a capability to overcome previous handicaps, not just for being a minority.