Affirmative action gets its day in court: Michigan ruling may change admissions policies at many schools. (In The News).

The United States Supreme Court agreed in early December to hear two University of Michigan cases regarding race consideration in the admissions process.

The long-running "reverse discrimination" cases stem from lawsuits brought by three white students who claim they were denied admission in Favor of "less qualified" black students in the mid-1990s. In one, Barbara Grutter was turned down from the U Michigan law school while in the second case Jennifer Gratz and Patrick Hamacher were denied by the larger College of Literature, Science, and the Arts.

The outcome of the cases--the first time the high court has addressed affirmative action in admissions since 1978 (University of California vs. Bakke)--could spark sweeping changes in university admissions procedures.

U Michigan President Mary Sue Coleman warned of the consequences if the justices ruled against the school: "Now is not the time to turn back the clock. A ruling overturning Bakke could result in the immediate resegregation of our nation's top universities, both public and private. It also could limit our ability to provide support to minority students through financial aid, mentoring, and outreach programs. We have only to took at the impact on flagship campuses in Texas and California to see the effects that such a change in policy would bring."

Jeffrey Lehman, dean of the U Michigan Law School (and recently named president of Cornell University), also defended the school's policies in a statement posted on U Michigan's Web site: "Our admissions policy reflects a cautious approach to affirmative action. It follows the guidelines established by the Supreme Court in the Bakke case 24 years ago. It is both realistic and pragmatic. That is why Secretary of State Colin Powell and former President Gerald Ford have spoken out in support of our admissions policy, as have General Motors, 3M and 30 other major corporations."

Although no decision is expected before early summer, court watchers are already busily trying to discern how the justices might rule. In December, Roger Klegg, general counsel for the Center for Equal Opportunity, a Washington group opposed to affirmative action, said, "Without exception, the court has been very reluctant to allow state institutions in particular to use racial and ethnic classifications." The swing vote in the Court, Klegg told reporters, may belong to Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, who has rejected the use of affirmative action in past cases, and who wrote the Court's decision in two cases against the practice.