Return to Transcripts main page
Live From...
Supreme Court Hears Arguments Over Affirmative Action
Aired April 01, 2003 - 13:45 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
JUDY WOODRUFF, CNN ANCHOR: The Supreme Court today heard arguments over the issue of affirmative action.
The question, should race be a factor, when deciding which students get into the University of Michigan?
CNN's Kelli Arena was in the courtroom and join us live.
KELLI ARENA, CNN JUSTICE DEPARTMENT CORRESPONDENT: Hi, there, Judy. The justices heard arguments concerning admissions policies both at the University of Michigan undergraduates program and the law school. It is a very emotional and divisive issue. There are thousands of protesters who showed up, outside of the courthouse today, from very early in the morning. Many of those people here were in support of Michigan's policies.
What's more, there were more than 100 briefs filed. That is the most ever that have been filed with the Supreme Court. One of those briefs in particular cause the justices' attention. They pledge a great deal of time talking about it. was filed by 29 former military officers who made the point that diversity was an important issue, important for the military, in order to produce strong black military leaders and a strong military.
Before the court, lawyers for Michigan argued it was merely trying to assemble what it call add critical mass of minorities. The plaintiffs argue that this is just a quota in disguise. Here is what they said just a short while ago outside the courthouse.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I certainly believe that institutions needed to find their own missions and states needs to find what they want to do for their own states. So, I'm not convinced at all. The university should decide what they want, set their standards, and then create the kind of diversity that makes for a good educational setting and that's what we've done at Michigan. We've done it fairly, complied with the law and we feel very good about what we've been able to accomplish.
JENNIFER GRATZ, PLAINTIFF: I think diversity does benefit all students but it's diversity of many different thing, of experiences, economic status. Diversity is about your character and your experiences. It's not about your skin color.
(END VIDEO CLIP) ARENA: Now, judging by the questioning that went on in the Court, the Court does seem pretty divided on this issue and it looks like justice Sandra Day O'Connor could cast the deciding vote.
That decision is expected to be made public this summer, Judy.
WOODRUFF: All right, Kelli Arena, illustrating even as this war goes on and we pay a great deal of attention to it, that there are still critical arguments before the nation, including this one, before the high court.
Kelli, thank you very much.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
Aired April 1, 2003 - 13:45 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
JUDY WOODRUFF, CNN ANCHOR: The Supreme Court today heard arguments over the issue of affirmative action.
The question, should race be a factor, when deciding which students get into the University of Michigan?
CNN's Kelli Arena was in the courtroom and join us live.
KELLI ARENA, CNN JUSTICE DEPARTMENT CORRESPONDENT: Hi, there, Judy. The justices heard arguments concerning admissions policies both at the University of Michigan undergraduates program and the law school. It is a very emotional and divisive issue. There are thousands of protesters who showed up, outside of the courthouse today, from very early in the morning. Many of those people here were in support of Michigan's policies.
What's more, there were more than 100 briefs filed. That is the most ever that have been filed with the Supreme Court. One of those briefs in particular cause the justices' attention. They pledge a great deal of time talking about it. was filed by 29 former military officers who made the point that diversity was an important issue, important for the military, in order to produce strong black military leaders and a strong military.
Before the court, lawyers for Michigan argued it was merely trying to assemble what it call add critical mass of minorities. The plaintiffs argue that this is just a quota in disguise. Here is what they said just a short while ago outside the courthouse.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I certainly believe that institutions needed to find their own missions and states needs to find what they want to do for their own states. So, I'm not convinced at all. The university should decide what they want, set their standards, and then create the kind of diversity that makes for a good educational setting and that's what we've done at Michigan. We've done it fairly, complied with the law and we feel very good about what we've been able to accomplish.
JENNIFER GRATZ, PLAINTIFF: I think diversity does benefit all students but it's diversity of many different thing, of experiences, economic status. Diversity is about your character and your experiences. It's not about your skin color.
(END VIDEO CLIP) ARENA: Now, judging by the questioning that went on in the Court, the Court does seem pretty divided on this issue and it looks like justice Sandra Day O'Connor could cast the deciding vote.
That decision is expected to be made public this summer, Judy.
WOODRUFF: All right, Kelli Arena, illustrating even as this war goes on and we pay a great deal of attention to it, that there are still critical arguments before the nation, including this one, before the high court.
Kelli, thank you very much.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
