Anticipated Court decision upsetting

EDITORIAL BOARD Editor in
Chief  Timothy Kudo

Managing Editor
 Michael Falcone

Viewpoint Editor
 Cuauhtemoc Ortega

Staff Representatives
 Maegan Carberry
 Edward Chiao
 Kelly Rayburn

Editorial Board Assistants
 Maegan Carberry
 Edward Chiao

  Unsigned editorials represent a majority opinion of
the Daily Bruin Editorial Board. All other columns, letters and
artwork represent the opinions of their authors.   All
submitted material must bear the author’s name, address, telephone
number, registration number, or affiliation with UCLA. Names will
not be withheld except in extreme cases.   The Bruin
complies with the Communication Board’s policy prohibiting the
publication of articles that perpetuate derogatory cultural or
ethnic stereotypes.   When multiple authors submit
material, some names may be kept on file rather than published with
the material. The Bruin reserves the right to edit submitted
material and to determine its placement in the paper. All
submissions become the property of The Bruin. The Communications
Board has a media grievance procedure for resolving complaints
against any of its publications. For a copy of the complete
procedure, contact the Publications office at 118 Kerckhoff Hall.
Daily Bruin 118 Kerckhoff Hall 308 Westwood Plaza Los Angeles, CA
90024 (310) 825-9898

In a bittersweet victory for affirmative action, a Michigan
court said Tuesday that the University of Michigan’s policy
of race-conscious admissions is legal. However, it’s likely
the decision will be sent to the Supreme Court and quickly
overturned by the conservative-majority board.

While it’s encouraging to see a high-ranking branch of the
government upholding a commitment to diversity, it’s equally
discouraging to know it will probably be reversed by the
politically-motivated Supreme Court. And at that level, the
decision would deal a staggering, if not fatal, blow to affirmative
action. Affirmative action may have been better off if Michigan had
lost this case.

Most troubling is the idea that the high court cannot be trusted
to examine issues objectively. Were it less infested with party
politics, the Court would uphold the Michigan ruling. After all,
with the exception of the 2000 presidential election, states’
rights have been a priority since Rehnquist became chief justice.
But just as the Court’s willingness to deviate from its
priorities was exposed by the Republican Party’s need to
elect George W. Bush, this issue will help all justices find their
inner politicians.

Even in the post-Civil Rights era, there’s still a long
way to go before people of all races and ethnicities have equal
access to both college and society. The Court may be able to change
its colors when the time is fitting, but people don’t have
that option ““ and it’s time we stop punishing them for
it.