The United States’ struggle to establish racial equality has not been a short one and the Supreme Court ruling against the use of affirmative action policies to fight the inequalities experienced by races traditionally disenfranchised and marginalised is evidence enough that it is a struggle that is far from over. The court ruling, which came late last June decided that the use of institutional policies that considered the race of an applicant in its admission was unconstitutional. These admission policies had been in place to ensure that disenfranchised communities such as the Black, Hispanic, and Native American communities among others had the same access to education as their peers. The ruling, which was passed against the University of Harvard and the University of North Carolina, effectively impacts the admission policies of universities and colleges across the country.
Students for fair admissions
The case against affirmative action was brought before the Supreme Court by the ‘Students for Fair Admissions’, led by Edward Blum, an anti-affirmative action activist. The case was brought before the Supreme Court as a result of an appeal against lower court rulings that upheld previous precedents set to protect affirmation policies set in place in the University of North Carolina and in the University of Harvard. The Students for Fair Admissions made the claim that these policies in the two universities are discriminatory against Asian American applicants. In their defence, the two Universities stated that race was only one factor considered in individualised evaluations for admission without ‘quotas’, which had so far been permissible under Supreme Court rulings. The newest ruling decided that affirmative action programs violated the US constitution’s promise of equal protection for all under the law.
Lessons learnt by banning affirmative action in academia
Although a Supreme Court order banning affirmative action to increase racial representation in academia is a first, it is not the first time that a decision was made to do so by the powers that be. Students in nine US states: Arizona, California, Florida, Idaho, Michigan, Nebraska, New Hampshire, Oklahoma, and Washington, have already been experiencing this situation for many decades. Affirmative action in these states was mostly banned through a state-wide vote and offers a good example of what the academic landscape would look like when conscious effort is not made to include a diverse range of students and faculty members. Two universities that were affected, the University of California and the University of Michigan, submitted arguments to the Supreme Court in defence of affirmative action to protect the integrity of academia as a whole.
The University of California
In its presentations, the University of California submitted many data points to show how the lack of affirmative action skewed racial representation in academia. In 2019 for example, more than half of the number of high school graduates had been Latinx: in contrast, only a quarter of university admissions in the same year included Latin students in the same year. 6% of high school graduates in 2019 were black, and yet only 4% of new students at the university were black.
The University has also reportedly spent more than 500 million USD on programs to try and access students from low-income backgrounds, attended ‘educationally disadvantaged’ schools, and on ‘holistic’ application review processes, with the conclusion that “although these programs have increased geographic diversity, they have not substantially increased the racial diversity of students admitted to UC. They have had little impact at the most selective campuses”.
University of Michigan
The University of Michigan also presented their findings on how the lack of affirmative action had affected racial representation in the student body. The University reported that since the ban, Black enrolment had fallen by 44% and that the admission and enrollment of students from underrepresented communities has decreased as well. Surveys also found that a quarter of students from traditionally underrepresented backgrounds reported that they didn’t feel like they ‘belonged’ within the University environment, revealing that the lack of representation was beginning to affect inclusivity as well. The increase in students who felt alienated due to their backgrounds was an increase of 66% from the previous decade.
Like the University of California, the University of Michigan had also made efforts other than affirmative-action admission policies to include underrepresented communities within their student body. In their written representations to the Supreme Court, UoM said that “the University’s 15-year-long experiment in race neutral admissions thus is a cautionary tale that underscores the compelling need for selective universities to be able to consider race as one of many background factors about applicants” and the ban on affirmative action had caused a “marked and sustained drop especially among the most underrepresented groups, Black and Indigenous students”.
The need for affirmative action in an educational setting
Despite the justice system’s best efforts, it does not exist inside a vacuum, and the social and political climate that brought the Supreme Court ruling to pass has been years in the making. It is therefore necessary to bring the pragmatic necessity of multi-cultural representation in education to the forefront of the public consciousness. A letter by the Board of Directors of the American Council on Education details why diversity adds to the quality of education in any institution:
Diversity enriches the educational experience
Despite what many think, diversity can enrich the educational experience. Classrooms that are populated with students from diverse cultures and races bring a multitude of experiences and perspectives that can help each generation of students interpret and reinterpret existing pedagogy and subject material in new and enlightening ways. In short, a diverse classroom is not just a platform for passive learning, but a potential to add to current human understanding.
It promotes personal-growth and a healthy society
A diverse classroom challenges stereotypes and preconceptions by encouraging critical thinking. Students exposed to others with vastly different perceptions and life experiences are forced to question their own belief systems. Engaging with the unknown and accepting the possibility of a multitude of different ways of thinking instead of one ‘correct’ one encourages social harmony and unity.
It strengthens communities and the workplace
The diversity fostered by educational institutes is ultimately the diversity that is passed on to the workforce in society. The accepting, tolerant society built in colleges and universities strengthen the organisations and the communities they step into with the same values as well.
It enhances America’s economic competitiveness
Perhaps the potential a diverse student body has to enhance America’s economic competitiveness on the global scale would resonate with dissenters where other arguments would not. Diverse student bodies, and consequently, diverse workforces allow the American economy to access a diverse talentpool informed by a multitude of thinking patterns. It also ensures that no productivity is lost in engaging in superficial cultural conflicts or in engaging with entrenched belief systems.
Are affirmative action policies unfair to others?
It is important to remember that diversity requirements do not justify opportunities being handed out to unqualified applicants, especially at the expense of qualified others. However, it is also important to remember the underlying justification for affirmative action. Traditionally marginalised communities are also historically disenfranchised peoples, be it on the social, economic, or the political sphere, and often, on all three. This means that these communities are vastly underprivileged in terms of accessing the resources necessary to qualify for higher education like their more privileged peers.
Representation in secondary and higher education has been a long standing issue in the American education system. The current court ruling can seem rather discouraging, even depressing, and may appear to fly in the face of widespread understanding of the need for infrastructure that fosters social justice. However, present realities need only inform the future and it needn’t form it completely. Even if there is no longer room for affirmative action in admission, educational institutes and their stakeholders should work together to develop suitable, more sophisticated tools that ensure that all prospective students have equal access to quality education throughout the country.
(Theruni Liyanage)