A Case For Affirmative Action

Affirmative Action allows universities to consider beyond standard measures of success such as SAT scores and class ranking, in which minority students are often disadvantaged. It provides individuals from disadvantaged backgrounds the opportunity to underscore the role of their identity in creating a framework for their passions and prospects. For some like, freshman Subhan Khan, race-conscious measures of admission mean understanding how an individual's racial background and experiences deriving thereof morph their identity. However, with the Supreme Court ruling last month, against affirmative action, many students feel we, as a country, are taking strides backward. Considering the history of elite educational institutions, like Harvard which was the focus of the SCOTUS case, rulings like these force them and prospective students to grapple with their legacies of discrimination. As stated in census records, published by the United States Bureau of Commerce, white students constituted 91% of college admissions in 1970. Approaching the conversation based on race, Harvard was home to labs in which “race science” was promoted and researched to biologically justify racial subordination. 

In decisive debates such as these, however, it is important to regard each side of the argument equally. Junior Kyla Montoya, claims, “Whereas I do understand the noble intentions of colleges providing opportunities to minorities that may otherwise be prohibited for numerous socio-cultural reasons, the underlying tones that affirmative action exudes to me is background over achievement— underweighting what capabilities a student has over their background, which takes precedence. From a socially-sensitive perspective, I deem affirmative action as a necessity for underprivileged backgrounds. However, when imagining myself in a position where I do receive a special opportunity from affirmative action, I find it to be slightly discouraging as I know that the factors which they chose me for were not just because they find me to be an academically formidable student.” The claims of the proponents supporting the barring of affirmative action can best be summarized in the following quote from the founder and president of the Students for Fair Admissions, who claims, “The opinion of the Supreme Court today marks the beginning of the restoration of a colorblind covenant”. The idea that the anti-affirmative action movement introduces is that the ruling would allow education to progress towards a ‘colorblind’, egalitarian education system. This in theory would redefine the educational system, but fails to acknowledge the centuries of discrimination towards minority groups and also systemic racism present in various steps of the system. Aligned with this, the SCOTUS ruling postulates that the admissions process disadvantaged white and Asian students while benefiting others.

The conversation post-SCOTUS ruling shifts into a more approach-based one. Many elite colleges are looking to past historical rulings that banned race conscience measures. According to the NAACP, following California's barring of affirmative action in 1996, admission of minority students at the state's most selective universities fell nearly 50%.  Many argue that school diversity levels and affirmative action are not correlated, however, statistics like these affirm their substantial relationship. The latter worries prospective applicants like junior, Win Hla, who claims that although affirmative action can be detrimental to some students, it is largely beneficial to most. She also feels the system offsets and in a sense pays reparations for injustices precipitated by periods of discrimination such as segregation, slavery, and displacement of native populations. Her perspective is further paralleled by an Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research poll, which demonstrated that most Americans were in favor of affirmative action. 

Ultimately, the decision lies in the hands of powerful judicial institutions and their rulings. However, it is instrumental to remember that at the root of the American identity is the ability to express and appreciate distinct opinions. The contribution of distinctive perspectives plays a role in changing interpretations of constitutional texts. Given this, it is integral for students, as primary stakeholders, to protest or affirm the views of the Supreme Court, as their decision will impact the educational landscape of the future.