 |
| Supreme Court Justice, Clarence Thomas |
Affirmative Action as it has been applied since the Supreme Court ruled in the University of California v Bakke (1978)was decided with the best of intentions. The court upheld the university's right to use race as a factor in choosing among qualified students. They correctly perceived that in the past college admissions policies (whether intentional or not) were racist. Black and Hispanic students were under represented in top universities like Harvard and Yale. The court sought to right that wrong with a policy that favored black and Hispanic students at the expense of merit based more qualified white students.
I recall the reaction of Allan Bakke - the student who was the plaintiff had been refused admission to the UC med school because 18 out of 100 seats were reserved for disadvantaged students. He was surely upset by that decision after all his hard work in the goal of going to that med school and yet he was passed over for admission to a top school in favor of a 18 students of lesser merit simply because of his skin color. Diversity had become more important than merit. A grossly unfair determinant for college admissions
But what about that? Is diversity not a worthwhile goal? Of course it is. But racism in reverse is not the right way to achieve that. There are other better ways to do that. Diversity can be more fairly achieved with alternative approaches. Like focusing on improving early education; providing equal access to quality schooling for all; and programs designed to address the specific challenges faced by students from disadvantaged socio-economic conditions. There are plenty of white applicants that this would apply to.
While it is probably true that there is a much larger proportion of black and Hispanic students in that category. But skin color should never be the basis of admission to a university. Why should poor white students be penalized just for being white?
The Supreme Court has now ruled s that using race as the basis of admission to a university is inherently unfair and unconstitutional
Affirmative Action was a policy that was implemented at great cost. Not only to white students, but to Black and Hispanic students as well. Justice Clarence Thomas who is himself Black and sided with the majority noted, that it was high time the Black community stopped thinking of themselves as victims.
Although Justice Sotomeyer has acknowledged that she was a beneficiary of Affirmative Action and was one of the 3 dissenters, it is highly unlikely that most other siuch beneficiaries would put that on their resume. It would send a message that they could not succeed on their own merit without external help.
The public perception of an ‘Affirmative action’ doctor is to think of them as second rate – to be avoided when looking for someone to treat a serious illness. It may not be true. But the precption is there and it is a logical - if an occasionally erroneous judgment to make.
Equality should promote equal opportunities for all, without relying on identity-based preferential treatment. A truly egalitarian society must be colorblind. And judge people based on the merit of their skills and achievements. Not on the color of their skins. Affirmative Action perpetuated a system that is inherently discriminatory since it prioritizes diversity over merit.
To me this is a no-brainer. Apparently so too is the view of 70% of Americans that oppose race being a factor in college admissions. Quotas that were used to assure diversity are just as wrong as when they were used against us to limit the number of Jews that would be admitted. We fought against that policy and won. Not to have it thrown back in our faces from he opposite direction.
That has now been rectified. Race can no longer be considered.
Affirmative Action tried to right a wrong at great cost to the democratic values this country stands for.. Thank You, Supreme Court for restoring those values.
