The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday handed down a split decision on affirmative action in two University of Michigan cases, upholding admissions practices at the school’s law program but invalidating the undergraduate school’s point system.

Despite the negative ruling for Michigan’s undergraduate program, Northwestern officials said NU’s recruiting practices will not be affected.

“The court very clearly stated that race can be used as one of the many factors for admission,” said Keith Todd, director of undergraduate admission.

NU considers race as one of many factors during the admissions process — similar to Michigan’s law school. Michigan’s undergraduate admission system, however, relies on a point system that uses race as a decisive factor by awarding extra points for underrepresented minorities.

In a 6-3 decision penned by Chief Justice William Rehnquist, the court ruled that the undergraduate admissions process was unconstitutional and failed to individually consider applicants.

But the court upheld the affirmative action program at Michigan’s law school in a 5-4 decision written by Justice Sandra Day O’Connor.

O’Connor wrote that “the Court expects that 25 years from now, the use of racial preferences will no longer be necessary” to recruit diverse student bodies.

Todd said he is unsure if that will become a reality.

“I can’t predict the future,” Todd said. “All I can say is that we’re optimistic and that we will continue to refine the program.”

Both lawsuits against Michigan were filed in 1997 by white students who claimed they were not admitted to Michigan’s undergraduate and law schools because affirmative action policies gave preference to minority students. In 1978 the Court declared strict quota systems unconstitutional in the case of Regents of the University of California v. Bakke.

Michigan officials consider Monday’s split decision “a tremendous victory,” according to a statement by university president Mary Sue Coleman on a university Web site dedicated to the cases. She wrote that the university will modify its undergraduate admissions strategy to comply with the ruling.

“The court has provided two important signals,” Coleman wrote. “The first is a green light to pursue diversity in the college classroom. The second is a road map to get us there.”

The court’s decision applies to all universities and colleges, including private institutions. But NU President Henry Bienen said he does not believe the Michigan decision will change any practices at NU.

“I am very pleased that the Supreme Court affirmed Bakke and reasserted that race can be taken into account in universities making admission decisions,” Bienen wrote in a June 24 e-mail. “That was the key point for Northwestern.”

At a candlelight vigil for the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. Day in January, Bienen spoke about the importance of preserving racial diversity through admissions. NU also filed a “friend of the court” brief in February with 29 other private universities supporting Michigan and its affirmative action policies.

Tracy Carson, coordinator of the black student alliance For Members Only, said she was at first worried the court would strike down affirmative action but is “ecstatic” that justices ruled “in support of racial diversity.”

“Affirmative action is necessary to ensure that the community that NU builds or that any institution builds is not homogenous,” said Carson, a Weinberg senior.

But John McGinnis, a professor at NU’s Law School who said he generally opposes affirmative action, said he has reservations about the Court’s decision because it seems to allow judges “to pick and choose” when race can be used in admissions.

“It’s giving discretion to judges to make decisions about what kind of discrimination they think is reasonable,” McGinnis said.