U.S. Supreme Court Strikes Down Affirmative Action In Higher Education Admission

[RAMROD 116,994]

The Supreme Court on Thursday struck down affirmative action in college admissions, forcing institutions of higher education to look for new ways to achieve diverse student bodies.

The court’s conservative majority overturned admissions plans at Harvard and the University of North Carolina, the nation’s oldest private and public colleges, respectively.

Chief Justice John Roberts said that for too long universities have “concluded, wrongly, that the touchstone of an individual’s identity is not challenges bested, skills built, or lessons learned but the color of their skin. Our constitutional history does not tolerate that choice.”

Justice Clarence Thomas, the nation’s second Black justice who had long called for an end to affirmative action, wrote separately that the decision “sees the universities’ admissions policies for what they are: rudderless, race-based preferences designed to ensure a particular racial mix in their entering classes.”

Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote in dissent that the decision “rolls back decades of precedent and momentous progress.”

Both Thomas and Sotomayor took the unusual step of reading a summary of their opinions aloud in the courtroom.

The vote was 6-3 in the North Carolina case and 6-2 in the Harvard case. Jackson sat out the Harvard case because she had been a member of an advisory governing board there.

The Supreme Court had twice upheld race-conscious college admissions programs in the past 20 years, including as recently as 2016.

Lower courts also had upheld the programs at both UNC and Harvard, rejecting claims that the schools discriminated against white and Asian American applicants.

The college admissions disputes are among several high-profile cases focused on race in America, and were weighed by the conservative-dominated, but most diverse court ever. Among the nine justices are four women, two Black people and a Latina.

The justices earlier in June decided a voting rights case in favor of Black voters in Alabama and rejected a race-based challenge to a Native American child protection law.

The affirmative action cases were brought by conservative activist Edward Blum, who also was behind an earlier affirmative action challenge against the University of Texas as well as the case that led the court in 2013 to end use of a key provision of the landmark Voting Rights Act.

Blum formed Students for Fair Admissions, which filed the lawsuits against both schools in 2014.

Blum’s group also contended that colleges and universities can use other, race-neutral ways to assemble a diverse student body, including by focusing on socioeconomic status and eliminating the preference for children of alumni and major donors.

The schools said that they use race in a limited way, but that eliminating it as a factor altogether would make it much harder to achieve a student body that looks like America.

At the eight Ivy League universities, the number of nonwhite students increased by 55% from 2010 to 2021, according to federal data. That group, which includes, Native American, Asian, Black, Hispanic, Pacific Islander and biracial students, accounted for 35% of students on those campuses in 2021, up from 27% in 2010.

The end of affirmative action in higher education in California, Michigan, Washington state and elsewhere led to a steep drop in minority enrollment in the states’ leading public universities.

They are among nine states that already prohibit any consideration of race in admissions to their public colleges and universities. The others are: Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Nebraska, New Hampshire and Oklahoma.

Every U.S. college and university the justices attended, save one, urged the court to preserve race-conscious admissions.

Those schools — Yale, Princeton, Columbia, Notre Dame and Holy Cross — joined briefs in defense of Harvard’s and UNC’s admissions plans.

Only Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s undergraduate alma mater, Rhodes College, in Memphis, Tennessee, was not involved in the cases.

https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-affirmative-action-college-race-f83d6318017ec9b9029b12ee2256e744?utm_campaign=SocialFlow&utm_medium=AP&utm_source=Twitter

[RichAssPiss 5,032]

"Our constitutional history..."

Miss thing, you want to look at history? Our constitutional history also allowed for slavery and for women to be treated as property who cannot own land or vote.

[Bling 31,680]

No shade but can someone explain to me why AA is a good thing? 

[CyanLights 15,576]

29 minutes ago, RichAssPiss said:

"Our constitutional history..."

Miss thing, you want to look at history? Our constitutional history also allowed for slavery and for women to be treated as property who cannot own land or vote.

Exactly, that’s what they want. 

[CyanLights 15,576]

24 minutes ago, WheresMy911Alice said:

No shade but can someone explain to me why AA is a good thing? 

It helps balance the already disproportionate education system in the US that tends to favor Caucasian/white school systems and admissions process compared to those rooted within communities that have a high population of minorities. 

[sarahb 17,185]

Tbh I think making it based on class rather than race would be fairer. 

[Ayesha Erotica 1,924]

It was not White Americans of European descent who brought this lawsuit for their owns interests in first place, it were Asians who score better in academic disciplines that went to court. Actually, Whites profited from this system so far, too, because Blacks were not using the system in their favor as much as North America-European-Whites did, who got free places after Asians were excluded.

Well, the AA system has been unfair towards Chinese and Indians and Harvard University has been racist towards the Chinese and Indian, many of them had fullfilled the necessary qualifications but were excluded, so I think the SC decision is the only right one.

I suppose HU is gonna secretly continue its racism in future by establishing geo-blocking criteria to exclude people from China and Inda by setting geographic burdens and quota per continent and justifiy them by saying "this is not about race but simply about continents; every continent is represented by quotas".

Though, the SC decision doesn't solve the problem that higher education is tied to class. I think, USA should transform its uni system after the Scandinavian modell, where 1) money is not a burden and 2) unis without high reputation are not treated as third-class and 3) where there are quality criteria for unis. In USA everyone can open a college and give bachelor degrees without quality control. Unimaginable in Northern Europe.

 

[CyanLights 15,576]

17 minutes ago, LoliLux said:

It was not White Americans of European descent who brought this lawsuit for their owns interests in first place, it were Asians who score better in academic disciplines that went to court. Actually, Whites profited from this system so far, too, because Blacks were not using the system in their favor as much as North America-European-Whites did, who got free places after Asians were excluded.

Well, the AA system has been unfair towards Chinese and Indians and Harvard University has been racist towards the Chinese and Indian, many of them had fullfilled the necessary qualifications but were excluded, so I think the SC decision is the only right one.

I suppose HU is gonna secretly continue its racism in future by establishing geo-blocking criteria to exclude people from China and Inda by setting geographic burdens and quota per continent and justifiy them by saying "this is not about race but simply about continents; every continent is represented by quotas".

Though, the SC decision doesn't solve the problem that higher education is tied to class. I think, USA should transform its uni system after the Scandinavian modell, where 1) money is not a burden and 2) unis without high reputation are not treated as third-class and 3) where there are quality criteria for unis. In USA everyone can open a college and give bachelor degrees without quality control. Unimaginable in Northern Europe.

 

It was a White American who brought this initial suit. The  suit was brought by Students for Fair Admissions (who claims to fight for Asian Americans students who have been impacted by admission offices) however that organization is run by Edward Blum, a white federalist society member who has been advocating and litigating for the revocation of affirmative action. 
 

https://fedsoc.org/contributors/edward-blum

[Roughhouse Dandy 13,595]

But they kept legacy admissions untouched. So they're fine with affirmative action but only as long as it's benefitting white people 😒

[Morphine Prince 109,645]

Horrible. But not surprising. 

[En_Sabah_Nur 9,366]

Gay Marriage will be Next!  SMFH

*Elections Have Consequences*  🤦🏾‍♂️🤦🏾‍♂️🤦🏾‍♂️

 

[Natalia Kills 412]

Yeah I can agree with this, broadly at least. 

Race itself shouldn't decide who gets into a university or not. 

I think universities should focus more on making things equal for students who come from less money or whose parents didn't go to college, especially those living in poorer areas. That way, you'd still be able to support those suffering the effects of systemic racism without isolating other groups as much (which turns out to be Asian-Americans, interestingly).

So in theory, many black and immigrant students would initially get the most affirmative support but you'd also include white and hispanic students from poor backgrounds, who are mostly likely to become conservative if they don't get an college education. Over time, this would even out and become most relevant to those that need it most. 

Plus, think about this way. Most Trump voters are people who don't live in the cities, didn't get to go to college, are usually somewhat religious and are white and increasingly hispanic. Perhaps it could help turn the tide if their kids had some affirmative support that could send them to liberal universities. 

[PartySick 172,385]

10 hours ago, RAMROD said:

Chief Justice John Roberts said that for too long universities have “concluded, wrongly, that the touchstone of an individual’s identity is not challenges bested, skills built, or lessons learned but the color of their skin. Our constitutional history does not tolerate that choice.”

This annoys the sh*t out of me.

Communities, especially communities that are largely POC, are still held together on top of spaces that were created in the segregation days. 

People faces challenges due to the color of their skin. They adapt skills to survive in a society that doesn't treat them fairly. They learn lessons when they have to overcome racial oppression.

Giving these people a boon - dibs on scholarships, opportunities, and outreach programs that would otherwise be out of reach for many of them - was the LEAST they could do to help lift them into a more equitable place.

Trash decision by a trash court.

[En_Sabah_Nur 9,366]

41 minutes ago, Pineapple said:

Yeah I can agree with this, broadly at least. 

Race itself shouldn't decide who gets into a university or not. 

I think universities should focus more on making things equal for students who come from less money or whose parents didn't go to college, especially those living in poorer areas. That way, you'd still be able to support those suffering the effects of systemic racism without isolating other groups as much (which turns out to be Asian-Americans, interestingly).

So in theory, many black and immigrant students would initially get the most affirmative support but you'd also include white and hispanic students from poor backgrounds, who are mostly likely to become conservative if they don't get an college education. Over time, this would even out and become most relevant to those that need it most. 

Plus, think about this way. Most Trump voters are people who don't live in the cities, didn't get to go to college, are usually somewhat religious and are white and increasingly hispanic. Perhaps it could help turn the tide if their kids had some affirmative support that could send them to liberal universities. 

Racism has come back with a VENGEFULNESS over this past decade or so… This was the Absolute WORST time to get rid of this law!  SMH 

 

[Natalia Kills 412]

On 6/29/2023 at 9:40 PM, En_Sabah_Nur said:

Racism has come back with a VENGEFULNESS over this past decade or so… This was the Absolute WORST time to get rid of this law!  SMH 

 

That may be the case but in this specific situation, affirmative action can benefit racial minorities who are from well-off households and realistically don't need as much support. It doesn't address the actual issues, whereas an income/poverty-based support would have a better impact on society and help turn many potential-future racists away from that path.