A scholarship reserved for minority students at Pepperdine University is one of about a half-dozen such programs across the country that violate the U.S. Supreme Court's rulings on affirmative action, according to two nonprofit groups that have filed complaints on the matter with the U.S. Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights.

Pepperdine's inclusion on the list struck some observers as a paradox, given its ties to the conservative movement. The university once offered a deanship to Kenneth W. Starr, the independent counsel who investigated President Bill Clinton.

"I was surprised by Pepperdine's resistance, but I am hopeful that with some additional reflection, Pepperdine's administration will do the right thing and open up these resources to students regardless of their ethnic heritage," said Edward J. Blum, who is affiliated with both groups that are questioning the scholarship. He is a senior fellow at the Center for Equal Opportunity, based in Virginia, and director of legal affairs for the American Civil Rights Institute, based in California.

Pepperdine officials insist that the scholarship, which provides as much as $1,000 a year to financially needy undergraduates who are members of underrepresented minority groups, is consistent with both the law and the Christian philosophy espoused by the college, which is affiliated with the Churches of Christ.

"It's our responsibility, given our Christian mission, to be not a white island but to reflect the diversity around us," said W. David Baird, dean of Pepperdine's undergraduate college.

In August, officials at the college, located in Malibu, Calif., received a letter from the organizations advising them that the scholarship was illegal under the Supreme Court's rulings last June on the University of Michigan at Ann Arbor's admissions policies.

In those decisions, the justices stated that colleges could consider race in admissions but only as one factor among many and only as part of a process that treated each candidate as an individual, not as a member of a group (The Chronicle, July 4, 2003).

Since those decisions were announced, colleges, politicians, and watchdog groups have argued over how to interpret them. But many legal experts have concluded that the rulings also apply to activities related to admissions, such as the awarding of scholarships.

Even before the rulings were handed down, groups like Mr. Blum's had adopted a strategy of challenging programs that they find objectionable, including ones at Princeton University and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (The Chronicle, March 7, 2003).

Pepperdine determined that it could continue selecting students for the scholarship under its existing criteria, which limit the program to about 50 black, Hispanic, and Asian students with demonstrated financial need.

"It is our understanding that boutique programs such as this are permissible within the guidelines," Mr. Baird said.

He said that the scholarship accounts for only about one-tenth of 1 percent of the total student-aid budget at the college, which costs about $36,000 per year to attend. The program also organizes seminars and special events for recipients, who might not initially feel comfortable on the campus.

"The whole idea is to create a sense of unity and identity among those who are venturing into our area," Mr. Baird said. "Malibu is a fairly privileged area, and those who come from underprivileged areas have a little bit of a culture shock when they get here."

But Roger B. Clegg, general counsel for the Center for Equal Opportunity, said that minority students may not be the only ones who need such a support network and that the college could use race-neutral factors, such as socioeconomic background, in its criteria for the scholarship instead.

"There are a lot of white kids who may be the first in their family to go to college, who don't have a lot of money, who are immigrants, who don't have English as a first language," he said. "I think it's a mistake to fail to consider the qualifications of all students, regardless of race or ethnicity, to meet the purposes of this scholarship."

Mr. Baird said Pepperdine would use its current criteria unless the Education Department determines that it is violating the law. But even at that point, he said, "I suspect we'll argue with them."

Mr. Blum said he hoped the situation would not escalate to that point. He said the college's Board of Regents includes a California Supreme Court justice, Janice R. Brown, who has ruled against similar policies in the past.

Justice Brown and others, Mr. Blum said, have "had long histories of conservative academic, judicial, and business philosophies," and might be inclined to persuade administrators to reconsider.