titution does not allow institutions to use race as a factor in the admissions decision.California is notorious for being the launching pad of many political and policy initiatives across the country. While there was not as many state ballot measures similar to Proposition 209 as may have been expected in this most recent election, the voters in the State of Washington passed a similar measure called I-200. Even though there were 30 days after its passage until it took effect, changes were being made immediately by state institutions to get ready to comply with this new law.The FutureThese are the "guesses" that I mentioned in the early part of the article. First, it is unlikely that restrictions on the use of race in admissions will come from a legislative body. States such as South Carolina have introduced and killed legislation that would have affected admissions. Recently, just this past year, in the House of Representatives, legislation was introduced and quashed just as quickly.Why is this trend likely to continue? Legislators want to stay away from divisive issues and as a result one agent of change (if there will be any) will come from state ballot measures. We have seen them in California and Washington. Similar measures will likely be passed in other states but it will probably not be a major trend across the country but instead isolated developments.Ultimately, the future of using race as a factor in admissions will likely be decided in the Courts. As Circuits have conflicting opinions on important legal issues, the Supreme Court will eventually feel obligated to reconcile the inconsistencies and develop a coherent body of law. The time frame is hard to predict and so is the eventual result if the Supreme Court was reviewing a case. The facts of course would be important but so too would be the party who brought the appeal and the make-up of the Court when the case was being reviewed.Legal experts and campus administrators wi...
