Bush May Enter Affirmative Action Case...

Associated Press

[RCW2001]

By Ron Fournier
AP White House Correspondent
Friday, January 10, 2003; 8:56 PM

WASHINGTON –– Bush administration lawyers are laying the groundwork to oppose a University of Michigan program that gives preference to minority students, a step that would inject President Bush into the biggest affirmative action case in a generation.

Bush himself has not decided what role, if any, the administration will play in the landmark case but several officials said Friday night he is unlikely to stay on the sidelines. White House political allies are planning to intervene against the Michigan program nonetheless.

The administration officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity, pointed to Bush's record in Texas and their continuing review of Clinton administration affirmative action cases as signs that the president is inclined to oppose the university's policies. Furthermore, he is likely to suggest alternatives to racial preferences that still promote diversity, officials said.

Bush is awaiting formal recommendations from Justice Department and White House lawyers before making his decision.

The Supreme Court, in its most important case this year, is expected to rule on the constitutionality of programs that gave black and Hispanic students an edge when applying to the University of Michigan and its law school.

The issue is a lightning rod both for conservative voters who back Bush and for minority voters, whom Republicans are courting.

Further complicating the White House's decision is the fallout for the GOP from the racially provocative comments that cost Sen. Trent Lott, R-Miss., his job as Senate majority leader. Bush denounced Lott's remarks, which were widely interpreted as nostalgia for segregation.

Siding with white students so soon after the Lott controversy could be seen as an affront to blacks.

The administration is not a party to the Michigan fight and does not have to take a position. Traditionally, however, the White House weighs in on potentially landmark cases.

Bush must decide soon. Legal briefs opposing affirmative action are due to the court Jan. 16, and briefs supporting the Michigan admissions plans are due in February.

Lawyers for political allies of the White House are drafting friend-of-the-court briefs arguing that the University of Michigan policy is unconstitutional, administration officials said.

The Justice Department is awaiting word from Bush on whether to file a brief of its own. At the least, Bush is expected to take a public stand on the matter and explain his position that racial quotas are not needed to foster diversity, officials said.

In Texas, Bush opposed racial preferences in public universities and proposed instead that students graduating in the top 10 percent of all high schools be eligible for admission. Supporters say the policy increased diversity because many schools are largely minority.

Among the cases that would bolster their argument against the University of Michigan, officials said, is a 1997 affirmative action suit that supported a white high school teacher's claim that she suffered reverse discrimination when laid off from her job. A black teacher was retained.

The Clinton administration argued that the school district's affirmative action policy went too far and could not be justified merely by the notion that a diverse teacher corps is a worthy goal.

"A simple desire to promote diversity for its own sake ... is not a permissible basis for taking race into account," the government said then.

The brief was largely written by Walter Dellinger, former head of the Office of Legal Counsel and later the Clinton administration's acting solicitor general. Administration lawyers consider at least one other Dellinger brief, a case involving a Wisconsin teacher, as further basis to argue against the University of Michigan policy.

Contacted Friday, Dellinger said the reasoning assumed that there is some role for affirmative action but noted that the tool can be wrongly used.

"The general position taken was that while the use of race is sometimes permissible in educational settings, it must be narrowly tailored and shown to advance important educational goals," he said.

In a 1995 memo analyzing the effects of a Supreme Court case over affirmative action in government contracting, the Clinton administration's Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel noted that the Supreme Court has consistently rejected racial balancing as a goal of affirmative action.

"To the extent that affirmative action is used to foster racial and ethnic diversity, the government must seek some further objective beyond the achievement of diversity itself," said the memo, largely written by Dellinger.

© 2003 The Associated Press

[TLBSHOW]

aristeides ASKS hOWLIN....

I see that once again you have failed to criticize Jesse Jackson. I wonder why.

Howlin ANSWERS WITH THE quote of the century!

To: aristeides

Why should I criticize him? I agree with him.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/820447/posts?page=61#61


lol

[Artois]

I would blame neo-con pundits even more than Republican senators (or, for that matter, Democratic Senators). The neo-cons turned the molehill into the mountain and the politicians, including Bush, merely jumped on the bandwagon.

[aristeides]

Bush is awaiting formal recommendations from Justice Department and White House lawyers before making his decision.

I wonder what this means. Surely he already has briefs from SG Olson. I can understand why a political animal like White House Counsel Gonzales might not have signed on to a position yet, but it would really surprise me if AG Ashcroft has not yet issued a formal recommendation.

[TLBSHOW]

Where White House officials stand on the issue

Key players in the debate over what position the Bush administration should take in the Michigan case that challenges racial preferences in college admissions: President Bush: Publicly he has not indicated where he would come down. He has rejected "quotas that tend to pit one group of people against another" but has said he is not against "policies that give people a helping hand so they can help themselves."

Attorney General John Ashcroft: As a senator from Missouri, he opposed government programs that gave minorities a boost in public contracting and otherwise accorded benefits based on a person's race. But during his Senate confirmation hearings for attorney general, he tried to soften that stance.

White House counsel Alberto Gonzales: A son of migrant farm workers who made his way through Harvard law school, he has spoken favorably about affirmative action. But he keeps his views close to the vest and, as a potential candidate for the next U.S. Supreme Court vacancy, might not want to be seen as a strong advocate on either side.

Solicitor General Theodore Olson: In private practice, he vigorously (and successfully) challenged affirmative action at the University of Texas and spoke out against racial preferences.

Karl Rove: The president's political adviser has not publicly touted an opinion on affirmative action. He likely is considering the pitfalls of Bush taking a position on the issue: If the president embraces affirmative action, it is sure to anger his conservative supporters. But if Bush doesn't, he could alienate voters in the nation's rapidly growing Hispanic population

affirmative action--White House torn over affirmative action case
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/820077/posts

[republicman]

If by chance Bush comes down on the side of racial preferences it is going to be very hard for some of us to forgive him.

[TLBSHOW]

Olson, like other key officials, would not comment on the dispute. If Bush backs Michigan, there is a chance Olson would not sign the brief. Government lawyers speculate that Olson would not risk undermining his credibility with the high court by signing onto a position he does not support.

As a senator from Missouri, Ashcroft opposed government programs that gave minorities a boost in public contracting. But during his Senate confirmation hearings for attorney general in January 2001, he said he would defend affirmative action policies.

[nwrep]

God Bless Bush!!!

End Affirmative Action

[Arpege92]

This is a very sticky situation and knowing that the liberal media are ready to pounce on this story to use as a battering tool on republicans makes it far worse. However, this could also be used to prove (again) that the public schools are in need of a change. Democrats need an excuse to force our children into public schools and give minorities a message that they can get into college because of their race should their academic record not be up to par.

By committing this scam they then have the excuse needed to keep minorities in the dark and completly dependent on the government.

[Fred Mertz]

Why should I criticize him [Jesse Jackson]? I agree with him.

howling said that? Now I've seen it all.

[TLBSHOW]

Yep old bush bot Howlin is a jesse jackson supporter!

[DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet]

Yep old bush bot Howlin is a jesse jackson supporter!

Hey there, Todd. You forgot to give Howlin a courtesy ping. Please - allow me.

[TLBSHOW]

She knows what she said and she is a jesse jackson supporter!

[Howlin]

Oh course I meant Patterson. But go right ahead.

[Howlin]

Fraud.

[Howlin]

And at least I own up to my mistakes. You just keep right on lying.

[Fred Mertz]

Patterson who?

[dogbyte12]

Worst Cut and Paste job ever!

[Howlin]

Jesse Lee Patterson. I agree with HIM.

Anybody claming that I agree with Jesse JACKSON is lying.

I made a mistake. And not the first one today.

[Fred Mertz]

I thought his last name was Peterson.

I think you need rest.

[TLBSHOW]

you said you agree with Jesse!