“We must not pretend that racial discrimination against minorities is no longer an issue in the United States. Although one’s race does not dictate one’s view — and this is part of what diversity on (a university) campus teaches — race, ethnicity and national origin do contribute to one’s experiences and opportunities in life, adding relevant perspectives.”

This statement, which is in support of affirmative action, comes from the amicus curiae brief filed on behalf of the University of Michigan by Stanford, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, E.I. DuPont de Nemours and Company, International Business Machines Corp., the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering and the National Action Council for Minorities in Engineering.

The brief is one of more than 100 that the U.S. Supreme Court received regarding the two affirmative action cases that the Court has agreed to review. Arguments for the cases were heard this week, as an estimated crowd of 5,000 to 7,000 people gathered outside.

The cases have received a lot of media attention because of the subject — it is the first time in 25 years that the Court has agreed to review a case dealing with the use of affirmative action in university admissions decisions — and because of the significant impact that the decisions will have on admissions policies at both public and private universities.

Stanford has made clear its commitment to diversity, both in its words and through its actions. In a presentation to the Faculty Senate in January, university President John Hennessy said that affirmative action is an appropriate and necessary measure to achieve diversity.

A racially and ethnically diverse student body is essential to a student’s academic experience because learning is not confined to the classroom. Much of what students learn comes from the interaction that they have with one another, and that kind of learning is greatly enriched by the varying perspectives that students from different cultures can offer one another.

In making the argument for affirmative action, Stanford and MIT assert that diversity, including racial and ethnic diversity, is essential to the advancement of science and engineering and that minority students are more underrepresented in science and engineering fields than in others.

Amicus curiae briefs, which literally means “friend of the court,” can be filed by people and by groups who do not represent a party in litigation but who believe that the court’s decision may affect their interests. While these briefs have no legal power in court, they are not unnoticed by members of the court.

DuPont and IBM, in joining Stanford and MIT in filing the brief, emphasized that a racially and ethnically diverse workforce is essential to their strength and success.

Such corporations rely on colleges and universities in recruiting and hiring employees.

Should university student bodies become less diverse, there will be a similar effect on America’s workforce. Again, the leaders of today and tomorrow need to be trained to deal with global issues and need an understanding of the diverse cultures that exist in our world.

It would be an understatement to say that the decisions made by the Supreme Court would only affect the face of university campuses. If the consideration of race and ethnicity is banned from university admissions policies, it will greatly transform the society we live in. We benefit from learning and living in a racially and ethnically diverse campus. We are better students and will be able to better contribute to society because of it.

This is a staff editorial from The Stanford Daily at Stanford University. This column was distributed by U-Wire.