AA in Public Education

The Michigan Law School's affirmative action initiatives illuminate the advantages and disadvantages of using a race-based criteria for admittance. The arguments on each side of the issue epitomize the controversy of affirmative action in the US. Grutter V. Bollinger reaffirmed the constitutionality and ethical grounds for upholding affirmative action by understanding that race is not something that can be overlooked in our society.
The petitioner's arguments uses the Equal Protection Clause as their main legal argument. They claim that the law school cannot justify racially discriminatory standards because there are ample race-neutral alternatives. I reject this claim due to the petitioner's dismissal of race as being a non factor in the education sector of our country. Race cannot be brushed over as an arbitrary factor. Racism in the United States is still immensely pervasive and needs to be addressed in our education system. Without facing the issue, diversity in our public institutions will not exist. Individuals from different ethnic backgrounds need to be represented in order to progress our academic system.
Sandra Day O'Connor explains the initiative's importance due to the "substantial, important, and laudable educational benefits that diversity is designed to produce, including cross-racial understanding and the breaking down of racial stereotypes". The Michigan Law School makes a clear connection between their affirmative action policy and how it is conducive to the educational environment and progression. I fully agree with the decision made by the Supreme Court in Grutter V. Bollinger. The decision reaffirmed the action our country and education system needs to pursue in order to overcome discrimination by means of taking race into account. If we do not consider race to be an important aspect there will in fact be a lack of educational diversity which will further entrench the racial barriers that have plagued our country.