Replies

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.

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

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.

Yes, it would surprise me if Ashcroft hadn't made a decision, and the same one the SG has. Now it's time for Karl Rove and President Bush to make a decision. I don't know much about the Michigan facts, but what little I've heard is really alarming -- like 20 points for the color of your skin and just 1 point for the quality of your admission essay.

President Bush no doubt has competing recommendations sitting on his desk about the Michigan case. Odds are, he is choosing between staying out of the case, or filing a brief which opposes affirmative action. We now know from experience that this President has the courage of his convictions, and that the decision will be his, alone.

I would not be surprised to find out, after the fact, that Gonzlez may have recused himself from this process, on the grounds that in the near future he may be nominated to the federal bench, and the same issue may come before him as a judge.

Congressman Billybob