Is O’Connor’s Ruling an Oncoming Train . . .

Published July 8, 2003 3:00am ET



THE BIG HEADLINE in the Michigan affirmative action cases is that the Supreme Court, in an opinion written by Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, sustained the use of race in admissions policies. Less publicized is the fact that the court also held, near the end of its ruling in the law school case, that such policies “must be limited in time.” If you ask who is to make sure the policies are “limited in time,” the court doesn’t answer that. But once you consider the way federal law enforcement works, it is apparent the administration could play a vital role in bringing preferences to an end. Justice O’Connor began the passage by observing that “a core purpose” of the 14th Amendment was to do away with “all governmentally imposed discrimination based on race.” She said the admissions policy she and her colleagues had just upheld–and, thus, all policies like it–would be at odds with the 14th Amendment if they were to continue forever. Such policies, therefore, “must be limited in time,” meaning they must come to an actual “termination point.”

Trusted reporting.Unlimited access.

Subscribe for full access to Washington Examiner coverage, expert political analysis, and subscriber-only journalism.

Get Unlimited Access

Already a member? Log in

Cancel anytime.