Charging that the University's race-conscious admissions policies are "fundamentally flawed and amount to a quota system," President Bush announced his administration will file a brief with the U. S. Supreme Court today, opposing the University's position in two pivotal lawsuits before the Court.

The brief is an amicus, or "friend of the court," brief, which is filed by an individual or organization that is not affiliated with the case but would like to inform the Court of their opinion.

The lawsuits - Gratz v. Bollinger, challenging LSA admissions policies and Grutter v. Bollinger, challenging Law School policies - have been moving through the court system for the past five years. Last month, the Court agreed to hear the two cases during its current term.

In his speech, Bush acknowledged that racial prejudice still exists in the United States and that it is important to provide diversity in higher education. But he drew the line at the University's policies, which he said use an unfair quota system.

"University officials have the responsibility and the obligation to make a serious effective effort to reach out to students from all walks of life without falling back on unconstitutional quotas," Bush said in his address from the White House Roosevelt Room.

He described the specific policies used by LSA and the Law School, saying the 20 points added to a minority applicant's score is "often the decisive factor" in admissions. He also claimed the Law School admitted students to meet percentage targets while passing over students who have higher grades and test scores.

"Students are being selected or rejected based primarily on the color of their skin. The motivation for such an admissions policy may be very good, but its result is discrimination, and that discrimination is wrong," Bush added.

University President Mary Sue Coleman said in a written statement she was disappointed with Bush's lack of understanding of the University and how it benefits from diversity and its admission processes.

"We do not have, and have never had, quotas or numerical targets in either the undergraduate or Law School admissions programs," Coleman said. "We believe the Court will reaffirm its decision in (Regents of the University of California v. Bakke) and find that the University of Michigan's admissions system is fair and legal under the Constitution."

The Center for Individual Rights, a Washington-based law firm representing the plaintiffs, filed both suits against the University in 1997.

CIR spokesman Curt Levey said while he is glad the president came out in support of the plaintiffs, he does not think it will be a deciding factor in the Court's decision.

"We're going to win this because of the law and the facts and not because the president is on our side," Levey said.

Several politicians said they oppose Bush's action, including U.S. Rep. John Dingell (D-Dearborn), who said the University's existing diversity has helped mold it into a world-class institution.

"Mr. Bush cannot have it both ways. He cannot say he is for diversity while simultaneously attacking the very laws that protect minority representation," Dingell said in a written statement. "The President's comments sent the wrong message to America about discrimination, equality, access and opportunity."

Bush's alternative

In his speech, Bush came out in support of programs that promote diversity without using "quotas," such as the Texas Ten Percent Plan, which guarantees entrance to a state college for all high school students who finish in the top 10 percent of their graduating class. The plan was initiated when Bush was governor of Texas in 1997, three years after the 5th Circuit found the University of Texas's affirmative action program unconstitutional.

"In these states, race-neutral admissions policies have resulted in levels of minority attendance for incoming students that are close to, and in some instances slightly surpass, those under the old race-based approach," Bush said.

But critics said while the plan is politically attractive and racially neutral, it does not promote diversity as much as the consideration of race. They said many of the students going into these schools are not qualified for them because admission is based solely on class rank and many of these high schools are inferior.

University of Texas law Prof. Douglas Laycock also said the system does not encourage diversity because an equal number of white students from more affluent districts also benefit from the 10 percent plan, spreading out the racial impact.

"It distorts your whole admissions process," he said