Supreme Court to Hear Affirmative Action Arguments

On a topic not taking place halfway across the globe, the Supreme Court is set to hear arguments today against the University of Michigan law school acceptance policies. From CNN - "Justices will be asked to decide whether a state has a "compelling interest" to promote a diverse student body, or whether the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment forbids giving one ethnic group or minority special advantages over another. "

No one in this case is arguing that a diverse college experience is undesirable, but the methods by which to achieve that. Is it appropriate for a university to give preference to minorities - who traditionally make up a very small percentage of the applicant and enrolled - in an effort to facilitate diversity. Do the white students with slightly better scores have a right to admission? Should universities be allowed to pursue their own goals and take race as a factor to that end.

On a side note, I find it interesting that the regional roles are reversed for once here, as Southern schools are among the most diverse in the nation and it is area with traditionally low minority population that must artificially inflate their enrollment.

I don''t think anyone should get any help because of their race. However, I have no problem in helping poor people out which would in the end help more minorties.

I see no reason why the amount of melanin(sp?) in one''s epidermis should amount to a a major reason why your accepted or denied to a college. You should get into a school based on your qualifications/talents. However, I see no reason why there shouldn''t be help given to those on a low economic scale, this does 2 things it helps people that have difficulty paying for school & most ""low"" quality schools are those in a poorer area. Personally I think that Texas''s way of handling enrollment is the best, the top 10% of a school are garaunteed admission. I see a problem in a system like the University of Michigan which gives more weight to the color of one''s skin then to the grades/scores they achieved, I see this as a violation of the 14th ammendment, as well as being massively unfair to those, be they White/Asian, who scored very well but are denied because they don''t have the state sacntioned amount melanin in their skin.

I agree totally with dgrey on this one...spelling errors and all.

It also includes women too. When I went to college the only bias I encountered may have been the rumored sex preference at Cal Poly SLO. Of course its only a rumor but the population at the time was supposedly 3/4 male so they weighted acceptances towards women.

Granted there are plenty of other reasons for being passed over (impacted major) and I dont really feel slighted in the least. However, I got into every other college I applied to including: UC Berkley, UCLA, UCSB, UCI, Embry-Riddle, Cal Poly Pomona, UCSD, UCR, CSULB, etc. It just makes me curious.

Other biases generally excepted are schools prefering out of state students and graduate schools prefering undergrads from other schools.

Personally I think that Texas''s way of handling enrollment is the best, the top 10% of a school are guaranteed admission.

While it sounds like a good policy, it really screws over some of the brightest minds out there. This policy is applied to private schools as well as public schools. In my experience, students from private schools generally tend to be more intelligent and more qualified than students from public schools. In other words, if you go to a private school and you aren''t in the top 10% of your class, you may not be accepted even though you are more qualified than most public school students.