A landmark loss in the U.S. Supreme Court has not disheartened opponents of racial preferences in higher education.

In July, Ward Connerly, chairman of the American Civil Rights Institute, and other prominent advocates for eliminating preferences met on the campus of the University of Michigan at Ann Arbor. There they announced their plans to get an amendment placed on the November 2004 ballot that would rid the state of race, ethnic, and gender preferences used in public education, employment, and contracting.

Connerly said that their cause was not limited to Michigan. “In the weeks and months ahead, we will be exploring the feasibility of undertaking initiatives in other states, cities, and counties across the land,” he said.

Connerly, who was instrumental in the elimination of racial preferences in California in 1996 and in Washington in 1998, faces opposition from both political parties in the state. Democrats fear the measure might pass. Republicans fear the measure might bring more Democrat votes to the polls and hurt President Bush’s reelection chances.

‘Go home and stay there’

Connerly also drew heated opposition from Michigan Rep. John Dingell. On July 9, Dingell sent Connerly a blistering missive. “The people of Michigan have a simple message for you: Go home and stay there,” Dingell wrote. “We do not need you stirring up trouble where none exists.

“Michiganders do not take kindly to your ignorant meddling in our affairs. We have no need for itinerant publicity seekers, nonresident troublemakers, or self-aggrandizing out-of-state agitators. You have created enough mischief in your own state to last a lifetime.

“We reject your ‘black vs. white’ politics that were long ago discarded to the ash heap of history. Your brand of divisive racial politics has no place in Michigan, or in our society. So Mr. Connerly, take your message of hate and fear, division, and destruction and leave. Go home and stay there, you’re not welcome here.”

In response, Connerly cited the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution, and explained how the Constitution “confirms my right to visit Michigan, as a full-fledged American citizen and not simply as a tourist, is not contingent upon your invitation. As a taxpaying U.S. citizen, anywhere I set foot on American soil is my ‘home,’ just as much as it is yours.”

Connerly noted the “eerie similarity” between Dingell’s advice and actions and “Southern segregationists who sought the comfort of states’ rights to practice their discrimination against black Americans”:

• “George Wallace, Lester Maddox and others who shared their rabid and abhorrent views believed in treating people differently on the basis of skin color… and so do you.

• “They wanted to practice their brand of racism free from the interference of ‘meddling, outside agitators’… and so do you.

• “They called those who disagreed with them and merely wanted to exercise their right to assemble ‘carpetbaggers’ and ‘non-resident troublemakers’ who were ‘stirring up trouble where none exists’… and so do you.

• “They were arrogant, intolerant bullies… and so are you.”

Connerly said that he and the other supporters of a Michigan Civil Rights Initiative “are doing what the Constitution of Michigan allows; and you should not be seeking to abridge the right of American citizens to use processes allowed by law to implement their civic belief and values.”

Sanders is a policy analyst with the Pope Center for Higher Education Policy and assistant editor at Carolina Journal.