2003 -Affirmative Action after Grutter & Gratz: Where do we go from here?
Presenters and participants maximized the time spent at the 2003 AALL Diversity Symposium held Saturday afternoon at the Seattle Meeting and Conference. The title, a hotly debated topic, was timely and attracted close to 100 participants.
Mr. Henry McGee, Jr., a former prosecutor and civil rights attorney, currently a distinguished professor of law at Seattle University, Washington, argued on the side of favoring the use of affirmative action as one means of achieving a diverse student population on college campuses. Mr. Curt Levey, from the Center for Human Rights, a conservative public-interest law firm based in Washington, D.C. presented the argument against the use of affirmative action in higher education. Each speaker emphatically presented his argument and with statistics and excerpts from cases held a captive audience for more than two hours.
In his opening statements Mr. McGee emotionally fired up with his civil rights knowledge and background, graphically illustrated the demographics of law schools since the 1950’s. From his illustration he pointed out that law schools have always had low percentage minority enrollment and therefore the use of affirmative action did not account for Grutter and Gratz non-acceptance at University of Michigan. He upheld the use of affirmative action as the most appropriate action to bring about change and opportunity for many who would not have otherwise benefited from the educational system. Mr. Levey similarly defended his argument against the use of affirmative action for admission to college. He asserted that whites too are disadvantaged and the use of race as a criteria for college acceptance indicates profound inequality.
Although both speakers held opposing arguments they both believe that something needs to be done to eliminate the problem. They believe that an alternative to affirmative action is needed to eliminate the use of race as a factor in determining qualified college applicants. Mr. McGee believed that racial neutrality is hardly likely for a nation that is so racially divided. Mr. Levey admitted that he does not know when race will no longer be such a significant a factor. Both men believed that it is up to the nation’s colleges and universities to determine where to go from here. They agreed on the early grades, Kindergarten through twelve grade as the starting point for eliminating racial inequality through reassessment of standardized tests and inclusion.
There was a prolonged period of questions that provoked the thoughts of many of the participants. Many openly expressed their views and directed their questions to either Mr. McGee or Mr. Levey. It was evident that the majority in attendance did not see the justification for the Grutter and Gratz’s case and affirmed their approval of the use of affirmative action as the best way of providing a good education for the socio-economically disadvantaged ones in our racially diverse society.
It is fitting to conclude that although at times the session was sparked with controversy and heated cross talk, it was very informative and interesting. Appreciation is extended to members of the AALL Diversity Committee and our corporate sponsor, lexisNexis, who sponsored this year’s symposium.
Calmer ChattooUniversity of Miami School of Law Library
AALL Diversity Committee Member, 2002-2004