Post-Hopwood plans

[Richard D. Friedman]

At 02:45 PM 06/25/2000 -0700, you wrote:
>How about another analogy?  Hopwood clearly invalidated state
>minority scholarships.  Some argued that pure financial need based
>scholarships would make up for the invalidation, because the poor in Texas
>are disproportionately minority.  Under the reasoning on this board, Hopwood
>would then preclude the school from giving financial scholarships based on
>financial need.  Do you really think that makes sense?
>
>Frank Cross
>Herbert D. Kelleher Centennial Professor of Business Law
>CBA 5.202
>University of Texas at Austin
>Austin, TX 78712

I don't think that analogy holds.  I assume that UT already gave need-based
scholarships.  In any event, most universities did and do.  By contrast,
the 10% plan is, I believe, unique.  So far as I'm aware, neither Texas nor
any other leading university ever adopted anything like the 10% plan
without being in the situation of having to search for a replacement for a
traditional affirmative action plan, and indeed except for that nobody ever
seriously suggested anything the 10% plan, at Texas or any other leading
university.  Am I wrong on that?  I don't claim any special knowledge on
the matter.

Rich Friedman