Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action - Reason Foundation

More documents

Recommendations

Info

2things, they prohibit state colleges and universitiesfrom engaging in race-preferential admissions.The experience of CAS’s members puts it in auseful position to inform the Court about the legalissue presented in this case, which has been raisedand resolved in CCRI’s favor by both the U.S. Courtof Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and the SupremeCourt of California. See infra at Section IA.Moreover, CAS is in an especially useful positionto inform the Court about the importance ofthis case. As a result of the en banc decision of theU.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, themovement to pass voter initiatives that prohibitstate-sponsored discrimination of this kind hascome to a near standstill. Already-existing initiativeshave been placed in legal jeopardy.This threatens to put the cause of higher educationreform back several decades. There is nowconsiderable evidence of the positive effects theseinitiatives have on the education of affirmative action’sso-called beneficiaries. See infra at SectionII. CCRI in particular has been the subject of significantempirical research since its passage in1996; CAS is in an excellent position to bring thisresearch to the Court’s attention. This evidence iscrucial to understanding how, for good or ill, theCourt’s decision in this case will strongly affect thefuture of American higher education and of the academicsuccess of minority students in particular.The Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence isthe public interest law arm of the Claremont Institutefor the Study of Statesmanship and PoliticalPhilosophy, the mission of which is to advocate for
3the principles of the American founding. The CCJadvances that mission through participation in thelitigation of cases of constitutional significance, includingcases such as this in which the core principleof individual equality is at stake.Reason Foundation (“Reason”) is a nonpartisan,and nonprofit public policy think tank, founded in1978. Reason’s mission is to promote free markets,individual liberty, equality of rights, and the rule oflaw. To further Reason’s commitment to “FreeMinds and Free Markets,” Reason selectively participatesas amicus curiae in cases raising significantconstitutional issues.The Individual Rights Foundation (“IRF”) wasfounded in 1993. The IRF opposes attempts fromanywhere along the political spectrum to underminefreedom of speech and equality of rights, andit combats overreaching governmental activity thatimpairs individual rights.SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTAmici believe that the Petitioner’s argument isin keeping with the legal profession’s admirabletraditions of restraint and civility. Yet, the decisionbelow is a travesty of justice, and the task ofcalling it just that must fall to someone. Your ordinarilymild-mannered and forbearing Amici are notnoted for a tendency toward hyperbole. When wecall something a travesty of justice, as we do here,it is because we view it as exactly that.In 2006, a strong majority of Michigan voterselected to adopt MCRI. These voters took to heartMCRI’s core provisions concerning the need for
Page 5 and 6: ivHirabayashi v. United States,320
Page 7 and 8: viEbner, Michael H., & Tobins, Euge
Page 9: 1INTEREST OF AMICI CURIAE 1An affil
Page 13: 5[I]f the admissions committee of a
Page 19 and 20: 11charter amendment at issue in Hun
Page 21 and 22: 13Michigan legislature from passing
Page 23 and 24: 15Once such a law is passed, the gr
Page 25 and 26: 17sion would have to hold: The disc
Page 27 and 28: 19than its tendency to break and co
Page 29 and 30: 21fornia, between the years 1914 an
Page 31 and 32: 23Ayres & Richard Brooks, Does Affi
Page 33 and 34: 25were at less competitive schools
Page 35 and 36: 27rican-American and Hispanic stude
Page 37 and 38: 29ty, so it is remarkable that grad
Page 39: GAIL HERIOT4830 Hart DriveSan Diego

Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action - Reason Foundation

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?