The ruling overturned a 2012 decision by U.S. Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, which found Michigan’s affirmative action ban in violation of the 14th amendment’s equal protection clause.
But the court’s ruling alone will not likely affect MSU’s current admissions policies.
Administrators have behaved cautiously in recent years, instead favoring surrogate metrics such as socioeconomic status and geographic area to achieve a more diverse student body on campus.
Speaking with reporters Tuesday, MSU President Lou Anna K. Simon stopped short of calling the ruling a ?hinderance to the university’s recruiting efforts.
“I think it would have permitted us to employ some ?strategies and tactics that are, by definition, a bit more direct,” Simon said.
“Our admission processes have always consisted of a holistic review. We take into account a lot of factors,” Paulette Granberry Russell, a senior advisor to Simon, added.
She also said that the university “can’t grant preference of treatment based on race of students.”
In 2006, Michigan voters passed an amendment to the state constitution stating that Michigan universities “shall not discriminate against, or grant preferential ?treatment to, any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in ... public education.”
The measure passed with 58 percent of Michigan voters in support.
Black Student Alliance ?President Tyler Clifford said even though he was not against admitting students to college based on universal ?standards, he is worried about how the university will be able to maintain diversity on campus.
“I’m not against voting students to the same standard,” Clifford said. “I’m just curious to see how the university will respond to the pledge to diversity.”
In the 6-2 decision ?Tuesday, the court’s conservative majority said the ?ruling was not about how the issue of racial preferences in college admissions should be resolved, but instead about who should be in charge of resolving it.
“There is no authority in the Constitution of the United States or in this Court’s precedents for this Judiciary to set aside Michigan laws that commit this policy determination to the voters,” Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote in the majority opinion.
During a press conference Tuesday afternoon in ?Lansing, Michigan Attorney General Bill Schuette said the court’s Tuesday decision was “monumental.”
“Today’s decision by the United States Supreme Court is a victory for the ?Constitution and ... for the citizens of Michigan who ?overwhelmingly voted in 2006 to require equal ?treatment in admission to our ?outstanding colleges and universities,” Schuette said.
Schuette also said the diversity of student ?populations in colleges throughout the nation should be achieved by ?“constitutional means.”
In a dissenting opinion, ?Justice Sonia Sotomayor argued that the court’s decision fails to protect the constitutional rights of minority applicants to colleges and universities.
“For members of ?historically marginalized groups, which rely on the ?federal courts to protect their constitutional rights, the ?decision can hardly bolster hope for a vision of ?democracy that preserves for all the right to participate meaningfully and equal in self-government,” Sotomayor said in her dissent.
Justice Elena Kagan recused herself from the decision because she had worked on the case as United States solicitor general.
State News staff writers Sierra Lay, Ben Stram and Olivia Dimmer contributed to this report.
