# Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action, Integration & Immigrant Rights & Fight for Equality by Any Means Necessary v. Regents of the University

> Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · November 15, 2012 · 701 F.3d 466

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9843350

## Case

- **Full name:** COALITION TO DEFEND AFFIRMATIVE ACTION, INTEGRATION AND IMMIGRANT RIGHTS AND FIGHT FOR EQUALITY BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY (BAMN), Et Al., Plaintiffs-Appellants (08-1387)/Cross-Appellees, v. REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN, Board of Trustees of Michigan State University; Board of Governors of Wayne State University; Mary Sue Coleman; Irvin D. Reid; Lou Anna K. Simon, Defendants-Appellees/Cross-Appellants (08-1534), Bill Schuette, Michigan Attorney General, Intervenor-Defendant-Appellee; Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action, Integration and Immigrant Rights and Fight for Equality by Any Means Necessary (BAMN), Et Al., Plaintiffs, Chase Cantrell, Et Al., Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. Regents of the University of Michigan, Board of Trustees of Michigan State University; Board of Governors of Wayne State University; Mary Sue Coleman; Irvin D. Reid; Lou Anna K. Simon, Defendants, Eric Russell, Intervenor-Defendant-Appellant, Jennifer Gratz, Proposed Intervenor-Appellant; Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action, Integration and Immigrant Rights and Fight for Equality by Any Means Necessary (BAMN), Et Al., Plaintiffs, Chase Cantrell, Et Al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Regents of the University of Michigan, Board of Trustees of Michigan State University; Board of Governors of Wayne State University; Mary Sue Coleman; Irvin D. Reid; Lou Anna K. Simon, Defendants, Bill Schuette, Michigan Attorney General, Intervenor-Defendant-Appellee
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
- **Decided:** November 15, 2012
- **Citations:** 701 F.3d 466; 2012 WL 5519918
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Rogers
- **Judges:** Batchelder, Martin, Boggs, Daughtrey, Moore, Cole, Clay, Gibbons, Rogers, Sutton, Cook, Griffin, White, Stranch, Donald
- **Cited by:** 6 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- **Red flag:** Reversed by Schuette v. Coal. to Defend Affirmative Action, 134 S. Ct. 1623 (2014).
- Negative treatments: 1
- Distinguished by: 0
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9843350

## Opinion text

ROGERS, Circuit Judge,
dissenting.
I join Judge Gibbons’s compelling dissent.
Under the majority opinion, it is hard to see how any level of state government that has a subordinate level can pass a no-race-preference regulation, ordinance, or law. Doing so would perforce make it harder for one minority or another to obtain a preference at the lower level. That alone can hardly render the no-race-preference act unconstitutional. Whatever Hunter and Seattle hold, the Supreme Court cannot have intended such a ban.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9843350. Public record. Not legal advice.