[Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents Volume 39, Number 3 (Monday, January 20, 2003)]
[Pages 71-72]
[Online from the Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

<R04>
Remarks on the Michigan Affirmative Action Case

January 15, 2003

    The Supreme Court will soon hear arguments in a case about 
admissions policies and student diversity in public universities. I 
strongly support diversity of all kinds, including racial diversity in 
higher education. But the method used by the University of Michigan to 
achieve this important goal is fundamentally flawed.
    At their core, the Michigan policies amount to a quota system that 
unfairly rewards or penalizes prospective students, based solely on 
their race. So tomorrow my administration will file a brief with the 
Court arguing that the University of Michigan's admissions policies, 
which award students a significant number of extra points based solely 
on their race and establishes numerical targets for incoming minority 
students, are unconstitutional.
    Our Constitution makes it clear that people of all races must be 
treated equally under the law. Yet we know that our society has not 
fully achieved that ideal. Racial prejudice is a reality in America. It 
hurts many of our citizens. As a nation, as a government, and as 
individuals, we must be vigilant in responding to prejudice wherever we 
find it. Yet, as we work to address the wrong of racial prejudice, we 
must not use means that create another wrong and thus perpetuate our 
divisions.
    America is a diverse country, racially, economically, and 
ethnically. And our institutions of higher education should reflect our 
diversity. A college education should teach respect and understanding 
and good will. And these values are strengthened when students live and 
learn with people from many backgrounds. Yet quota systems that use race 
to include or exclude people from higher education and the opportunities 
it offers are divisive, unfair, and impossible to square with the 
Constitution.
    In the programs under review by the Supreme Court, the University of 
Michigan has

[[Page 72]]

established an admissions process based on race. At the undergraduate 
level, African American students and some Hispanic students and Native 
American students receive 20 points out of a maximum of 150, not because 
of any academic achievement or life experience but solely because they 
are African American, Hispanic, or Native American.
    To put this in perspective, a perfect SAT score is worth only 12 
points in the Michigan system. Students who accumulate 100 points are 
generally admitted, so those 20 points awarded solely based on race are 
often the decisive factor.
    At the law school, some minority students are admitted to meet 
percentage targets, while other applicants with higher grades and better 
scores are passed over. This means that students are being selected or 
rejected based primarily on the color of their skin. The motivation for 
such an admissions policy may be very good, but its result is 
discrimination, and that discrimination is wrong.
    Some States are using innovative ways to diversify their student 
bodies. Recent history has proven that diversity can be achieved without 
using quotas. Systems in California and Florida and Texas have proven 
that by guaranteeing admissions to the top students from high schools 
throughout the State, including low-income neighborhoods, colleges can 
attain broad racial diversity. In these States, race-neutral admissions 
policies have resulted in levels of minority attendance for incoming 
students that are close to and in some instances slightly surpass those 
under the old race-based approach.
    We should not be satisfied with the current numbers of minorities on 
Americans' college campuses. Much progress has been made. Much more is 
needed. University officials have the responsibility and the obligation 
to make a serious, effective effort to reach out to students from all 
walks of life without falling back on unconstitutional quotas. Schools 
should seek diversity by considering a broad range of factors in 
admissions, including a student's potential and life experiences.
    Our Government must work to make college more affordable for 
students who come from economically disadvantaged homes. And because 
we're committed to racial justice, we must make sure that America's 
public schools offer a quality education to every child from every 
background, which is the central purpose of the education reforms I 
signed last year.
    America's long experience with the segregation we have put behind us 
and the racial discrimination we still struggle to overcome requires a 
special effort to make real the promise of equal opportunity for all. My 
administration will continue to actively promote diversity and 
opportunity in every way that the law permits.
    Thank you very much.

Note: The President spoke at 4:30 p.m. in the Roosevelt Room at the 
White House. In his remarks, he referred to two related cases before the 
Supreme Court, Barbara Grutter, Petitioner v. Lee Bollinger, et al and 
Jennifer Gratz and Patrick Hamacker, Petitioners v. Lee Bollinger, et 
al. The Office of the Press Secretary also released a Spanish language 
transcript of these remarks.