A regent and Milwaukee attorney called for cooperation and talked Thursday in the Union about two Supreme Court cases that had an impact on the way colleges use race as a possible peg in college admissions.

In those cases, Grutter v. Bollinger and Gratz v. Bollinger, both decided in 2003, the Supreme Court ruled that race could not be used as a quantitative measure in admissions. The cases stem from the University of Michigan’s policy that used race as a quantitative measure.

The discussion, titled “Affirmative Action after the Michigan Cases: Only 23 Years Left,” and a part of the Diversity Dividends series, focused on both the Grutter and Gratz cases.

Jesus Salas, a regent from the University of Wisconsin Board of Regents, talked about previous affirmative action-related cases that had an influence nationwide, including the 1996 California Proposition 209, which said that the state could not judge race, sex, color or ethnicity to discriminate against or for preferential treatment.

“We really need cooperation,” Salas said.

He said that students need to be “vigilant” in terms of watching tuition and resources to help pay for it. He said that fees will continue to rise for the foreseeable future.

Attorney Kristy Downing was a student at the University of Michigan during the time that these cases were decided upon by the Supreme Court. She said the University of Michigan was the perfect place to be during that time period.

Salas said that pre-college programs could be threatened because they generally are race-conscious.

The response to those Supreme Court cases, Downing said, was that the court didn’t say that race couldn’t be considered, only that race could not be used as a quantified consideration.

The discussion was sponsored by the Office of Equity/Diversity Services.

> Comments