SPECIAL EPISODE: SUPREME COURT ENDS AFFIRMATIVE ACTION IN HIGHER ED -- A PRIMER

Join Hyatt for a special episode as he provides a primer on the Supreme Court's decision banning race conscious affirmative action in higher education.

Transcript

0:00

Welcome to the bevy podcast on the bevy podcast, we have fun, thoughtful conversations with friends. Pull a seat up to the table. Come chill with us. Hey, what's up. Welcome to the bevy podcast. Yesterday, the Supreme court dealt the death blow to affirmative action programs in higher education. And I want it to provide you with the. Primer. the decision to end. Affirmative action was a monumental break with precedent. The case was about whether or not Harvard and UNCs admissions policies that consider race as one, among many factors violated the equal protection clause The plaintiff in the case said that, yes, Now on the other side of the ledger, Harvard in UNC. And modeled their programs off of. Admissions programs. Upheld as constitutional for years and just a bit. context here. The equal protection clause was past. send the 14th amendment and the 14th amendment was passed. During the civil war to secure. Rights for black folks to make sure that black folks had equal. Citizenship. So let's get back to the case now. Just so that, you know, The program's at issue here. We're not quotas quotas have been outlawed by the Supreme court. These programs rather considered race as one of many different factors. I think UNC said like it's one of 40 factors and the same is true of Harvard. The idea was to have a holistic view of an applicant. But the Supreme court disagreed, At the end of the day. The court held that the programs here didn't serve compelling government interest. And that the means that the universities had. to Enact it to achieve the interests. Weren't that? Nearly tailored. So there wasn't a close match. Here's my reaction to this decision. For starters. I think that the decision was wrongly decided. And I think that the decision was wrongly decided because, as I mentioned before, the decision breaks with decades of precedent. Most recently the Supreme court considered affirmative action in a pair of cases in 2015 and the upheld. The. Longstanding precedent. That programs that were structured like UNC and Harvards or constitutionally permissible. So you have to ask yourself what happened between 2015 and now, and here's the answer. There was a change of membership on the court. The court. Not. Inch to the right word. It ran rightward and this new conservative majority has long been very skeptical of affirmative action programs and look low and behold, they knock it out. Second. I think that the case was wrongly decided because if you think about the equal protection clause, and if you think about that clauses, Real concern and purpose. The cause and concern was to ensure that minorities. Specifically black people secured the same rights and advantages of. White citizens. And this decision really takes that purpose. That animating purpose. And it turns it on its head. So what you have at the end of the day. Is a eradication of a program that has been tremendously and phenomenally successful at helping to ameliorate the longstanding discrimination against blacks and other members of underrepresented minorities in higher education So, where does this all leave us at the end of the day? Now colleges and universities will not be allowed to utilize affirmed faction in their emissions policies. And that serves as a tremendous roadblock. There is a small exception to that. In the decision, the majority. Noted that United States. Military service academies are not parties to. This decision. So there seems like there might be some allowance for. Race conscious admissions programs to still exist in some form that they resemble today. In that context. And second. Chief justice Roberts who wrote the majority opinion, said that nothing prohibits universities from considering an applicant's discussion of how race affected. The applicant's life so long as that discussion is concretely tied to a quality of character or unique ability that that particular applicant can contribute to the university in quote. So it's unclear of what this really means. It could mean that the student. Could talk about race in their admissions essay. But who knows? And before I wrap up. On my primer. On this decision. I just want to share a quote from justice. Catanese brown Jackson's dissent. And in that descent, she writes quote With let them eat cake. Obliviousness today, the majority poles live ripcord and announces colorblindness for all by legal fat, but deeming race irrelevant in law does not make it so in life. That sums it up and I Couldn't have stated it more. Precisely then cheated. So that's what I have for you now in this primer. Hope to have more conversation on this topic soon but until next time take it easy Peace