|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||
|
Supreme Court Reaffirms Affirmative Action Policies Institutions Grapple with New HIAA Regulations "Operation Tipoff 2" Bioterrorism Exercise Offers Educational Lessons Family Medicine: Trying to Fill the Ranks Current & Choice: 'Prime Time Innovations in Medical Education: The Arts as a Teacher A Word from the President: Educational Diversity is a Compelling Interest Viewpoint: Loan Help for Researchers
|
|
Supreme Court Reaffirms Affirmative Action PoliciesThe U.S. Supreme Court's June 23 ruling reaffirming affirmative action policies in higher-education admissions was welcomed by the AAMC as a positive step toward ensuring a diverse physician workforce. The high court ruled in two cases involving the University of Michigan, allowing race to be included as a factor in Michigan's law school admissions process by a 5-4 vote but disallowing a "point system" favoring minorities at the undergraduate school by a 6-3 vote. At issue in both cases was whether Michigan's consideration of race in admissions decisions violated the Constitution's equal protection clause or Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits recipients of federal assistance from discriminating on the basis of race, color, or national origin. In Grutter v. Bollinger, the high court held that the school's "narrowly tailored" use of race in admissions is not prohibited by the Constitution, deferring to the law school's judgment that it has a "compelling interest" in promoting a diverse student body. Back to BakkeWith the Grutter ruling, the court reaffirmed Justice Lewis Powell's opinion in the 1978 Regents of University of California v. Bakke case, which stated that admissions officials may take into account applicants' "academic ability coupled with a flexible assessment of [their] talents, experiences, and potential" to contribute to the learning of those around them. Justice Powell's landmark opinion declared that the university's goal was to "achieve that diversity which has the potential to enrich everyone's education and … make a law school class stronger than the sum of its parts."
In her Grutter opinion, Justice Sandra Day O'Connor - who, as predicted, provided the majority swing vote - wrote that "it is necessary that the path of leadership be visibly open to talented and qualified individuals of every race and ethnicity." That assessment echoes the AAMC's long-held position that diversity matters in higher education. "The Supreme Court's momentous decision will not only affect higher education, it will help ensure better health care for all Americans, now and in the future," said AAMC President Jordan J. Cohen, M.D. "By upholding affirmative action, the court will permit the nation's medical schools to continue developing an appropriate physician work- force for an increasingly diverse society." Friends of the CourtUniversity of Michigan President Mary Sue Coleman called the ruling "a tremendous victory for the University of Michigan, for all of higher education, and for the hundreds of groups and individuals who supported us," referring to the more than 60 friend-of-the-court amicus briefs the Supreme Court received in the two cases. Besides the AAMC, several universities and a wide range of organizations submitted supporting briefs, including a group of retired military officials. The AAMC's amicus brief in the Grutter case argued that a physician workforce capable of effectively meeting the needs of a diverse society can exist only if medical schools are able to consider race and ethnicity when selecting students. If medical schools were to ignore the race of applicants, the percentage of students from underrepresented minority backgrounds would fall from its current rate of 11 percent to no more than 3 percent, the AAMC's brief stated. The association argued that society's increasing diversity calls for continuing affirmative action policies, considering that nearly a quarter of the U.S. population belongs to a minority group. Point systems struck downIn the second case, Gratz v. Bollinger, Michigan's undergraduate admission process, based in part on a point system, was judged unconstitutional since it ran afoul of the standards for individualized consideration required by Justice Powell. "The university's policy, which automatically distributes 20 points, or one-fifth of the points needed to guarantee admission, to every single under- represented minority applicant solely because of race, is not narrowly tailored to achieve the interest in educational diversity," wrote Chief Justice William Rehnquist in the Gratz opinion. Despite that ruling, the university's president was not discouraged. "We will modify our undergraduate system to comply with today's ruling, but make no mistake: We will find the route that continues our commitment to a richly diverse student body," Coleman said. - Suria Santana |
||||||||
|
||||||||||
|
Contact Us © 1995-2008 AAMC Terms and Conditions Privacy Statement |