Earlier this week, Michigan’s affirmative action ban was challenged in the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati by a group of critics attempting to prove the ban is unconstitutional.

We understand affirmative action is a tricky issue. It clearly has advantages and disadvantages, and it’s completely reasonable to support or oppose the ban. Critics of the ban are well within their rights to continue to challenge the decision — made clear by voters — in the courts, but it’s unlikely to reap success. There is a time to legislate through the courts, but this isn’t it.

Civil rights groups and University of Michigan students, faculty and applicants say they believe the statewide ban on affirmative action to be unconstitutional, but we’re at a complete loss to understand why. If a piece of legislation is decided by the voters and affirmed by the courts, how can it be in violation of our Constitution?

We are not opposed to all affirmative action, but accepting applicants on a “point” system (wherein a person of a minority race gets more points than a non-minority) is not the way to go. To give a person a boost in the admissions process purely because of their skin color seems to be the very definition of discrimination.

Affirmative action, if implemented, must shift the focus to socioeconomic status, and not purely race. Although it’s true many minorities in this country are at a severe disadvantage when it comes to education, there are also many nonminorities who face similar setbacks who often are forgotten. If brought back, the affirmative action system would have to be dramatically revised.

Michigan’s affirmative action ban is constitutional, whether people like it or not. Although it’s understandable that people continue to be upset with the ban, it seems absurd to argue it on the basis of its unconstitutionality. If that is the path they plan to take, critics must do a better job of explaining themselves and their reasoning.

If there is a large movement against the ban in this state, the decision needs to go back to those who made it in the first place — the voters. Voters approved Proposition 2 years ago, and if there is a demand for the ban to be overturned, it should go back to the ballot. It’s highly unlikely the ban will be overturned by the appeals court, and it’s unfortunate a small group of critics might end up taking their pet issue to the Supreme Court.

Undoubtedly, there are many people in this state who support affirmative action — and that’s fine. But those continuing to advance and appeal these court decisions need to figure out why they keep fighting in the first place. Is it simply because they like affirmative action? Or because they truly find the ban on it unconstitutional?

If most critics believe the former argument, then they need to find another avenue of change, and discontinue their flawed, superfluous and doomed fight in the court system.