March 5, 2004
I dislike being so insistent, but sometimes
has no choice–given where we have to go.
Did others notice yesterday’s [Mar. 4] Houston
editorial titled “For Green”? The editors wrote
that they recommend Paul Green and
Wayne Smith to serve as Place 5 justice on the Texas
point to the fact that they prefer Green because
Smith is credited with the Hopwood lawsuit
“injuriously halted” race as an admissions factor in college admissions, which lost financial
aid for countless students in Texas. If students were injured by Hopwood almost 8 years ago this
March 18th , what can we say today about our admissions policy at Texas A&M?
continue to follow Hopwood’s color-blind policy.
In GRUTTER (June 23, 2003), the Supreme
allowed institutions like Texas A&M, who are
struggling to recruit minority students, to
tailor race as one of other accepted factors in college admissions.
We have, in short,
now a LEGAL tool–just as Hopwood
WAS legal–to recruit more minority students, but we
using that tool.
Indeed, our administration refuses to avail itself of that
Why? Because it basically does not want to. For there are now no constitutional
grounds for embracing Hopwood’s failed color-blind policies, especially when there is a perfectly good
and legitimate tool for recruiting the minority students that Texas A&M so badly
I believe that we now have no choice but to challenge the administration to
provide legal support for not considering race when that option is now legally acceptable. Not to do so
would make us remiss in our responsibilities to the changing demographics of the state of
So, how should we proceed?