Avoiding Another Michigan

THE SUPREME COURT WON'T consider the merits of the University of Michigan's affirmative-action policies for another few weeks. But even before the court rules on the closely watched case, some universities are cutting back on programs that favor minorities, so they won't be sued. Both M.I.T. and Princeton have decided to allow anyone to apply for summer programs that were previously open only to under-represented minority students. "It would be impossible to defend these programs legally," says Robert P. Redwine, M.I.T.'s dean of undergraduate education.

The widely publicized Michigan case involves policies that use race as a factor in admissions. But the M.I.T. and Princeton programs were race specific--and so were considered even shakier legally. The Department of Education's Office of Civil Rights launched an investigation of M.I.T. last May after receiving complaints from two groups that are opposed to affirmative action, the California-based American Civil Rights Institute, led by Ward Connerly (who spearheaded the 1996 initiative that banned affirmative action in California), and the Virginia-based Center for Equal Opportunity.

The groups have sent letters to more than two dozen other schools, including Yale and the University of Texas, hinting at legal action if they don't change their race-specific policies on some scholarships, fellowships and enrichment programs. School officials argue that these programs provide needed help to students who may not have the preparation and support for college. Responds Roger Clegg, general counsel for the Center for Equal Opportunity: "We don't have a problem with programs for the disadvantaged. But race should not be used as a proxy for disadvantage."

--By Perry Bacon Jr.