The University announced yesterday that it has signed a brief filed by Harvard University that asks the Supreme Court to uphold the University of Michigan's affirmative action policies in two cases to be heard this spring.
The ruling could determine whether race can be considered in college admissions.
The brief emphasizes the benefits of the decision in the 1978 case Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, which let selective universities consider race and ethnicity favorably in admissions.
The brief does not, however, fully endorse the University of Michigan's undergraduate admission policy, which assigns a numerical advantage for racial minority status, Vice President of Public Affairs Bob Durkee '69 said.
"What we really wanted to comment on in the case . . . was to support the principle underlying the Bakke decision, which was that race is one of many characteristics of an individual that can be taken into account in college admissions," President Tilghman said.
The Supreme Court will hear two cases brought by white applicants who claim they were rejected from the University of Michigan's undergraduate school and its law school because of racial preferences given to blacks and Hispanics.
The brief opposes the Bush administration's brief against the University of Michigan, which claims that the use of race in admissions represents unfair racial discrimination.
Instead, the administration promotes the use of "percent-systems," whereby the top fraction of students at a high school are automatically admitted, to promote campus diversity.
The Bush administration's suggestion represents a move away from Bakke that Princeton and other signers of the Harvard brief consider to be in the wrong direction.
"To abandon Bakke now would trigger wrenching disruption," the Harvard brief states.
In addition to Princeton and Harvard, the 'amicus curiae' — or 'friend of the court' — brief was signed by Brown University, the University of Chicago, Dartmouth College, Duke University, the University of Pennsylvania and Yale University.
The deadline for filing briefs with the court is today.
"What the brief is really focused on is the ability of selective universities to take race into account as part of their admissions processes," Durkee said.
There are several ways that the court could rule in the Michigan cases.
The ruling might be specific to the University of Michigan's point-based admissions process, in which Michigan automatically adds 20 points, out of a 150-point scale, for applicants of an Hispanic, Native-American or African-American background.
The University does not use points in its admissions process.
"The other, much more worrisome decision that they could take would be to overturn Bakke . . . For us, this would be a deeply troubling decision," Tilghman said.
Because the cases involve a public university, the ruling would not directly apply to private institutions, said Thomas Merrill, a visiting law professor at the University of Chicago and former deputy solicitor general in former President Bush's administration.
However, as the amicus brief states, because Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act forbids institutions receiving federal funding to engage in racial "discrimination," the decision could have a bearing on private universities like the University, which receive federal funds.
The impact of amicus briefs in major Supreme Court cases is unclear, Merrill said.
"I'm a little skeptical that in high-profile cases like this one, an amicus brief would sway the decision of the court," he said.
Fifty-four amicus briefs were filed in the Bakke case, the second or third-highest total in the history of the Supreme Court, Merrill said.
Princeton was not a signatory to any brief in that case, Tilghman said.
More than 50 briefs have been filed in the University of Michigan case to date, including briefs from companies, unions, civil rights groups and others.
Harvard general counsel Bob Iuliano said he had been working on the brief from about the time the Supreme Court decided to hear the cases.
There were no substantive changes made to the brief as a result of requests from any other signatories, Iuliano said.
The Court expects to hear oral arguments on April 1.
The Court should deliver a decision by mid-June, when its term ends.
The University receives federal support for various programs, including financial aid and scientific research.
Read More
Students weigh in on changes to hours at Murray-Dodge Café
Eojin ParkMurray-Dodge’s hours have been cut nearly in half. Previously, Murray-Dodge was open from 3 p.m. to midnight every day. Amid other closures of campus cafes, its hours have been reduced to 4:30 p.m. to 9:30 p.m. daily.
Murray-Dodge’s hours have been cut nearly in half. Previously, Murray-Dodge was open from 3 p.m. to midnight every day. Amid other closures of campus cafes, its hours have been reduced to 4:30 p.m. to 9:30 p.m. daily.
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson reflects on path to the Supreme Court in campus lecture
Isaac Bernstein and Justus WilhoitAt Princeton’s Harlan Lecture, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson discussed her journey to the Supreme Court, the power of dissenting opinions, and the importance of inspiring future generations.
At Princeton’s Harlan Lecture, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson discussed her journey to the Supreme Court, the power of dissenting opinions, and the importance of inspiring future generations.
Student employment in flux as University navigates budget cuts
Kian PetlinThe future of student employment remains uncertain amid budget cuts, with impacts ranging from reduced hours to staffing shortages.
The future of student employment remains uncertain amid budget cuts, with impacts ranging from reduced hours to staffing shortages.