What is affirmative action in US and what the Supreme Court ruling means

In a landmark decision the United States Supreme Court overturned decades-long precedents, effectively banning affirmative action in college and university admissions. This ruling prohibits educational institutions from considering race in their admissions process, a change that has ignited intense debate. Ruling 6-3 to end affirmative action in US higher education institutes, the ruling showed the ever growing divide between the conservative and liberal judges on the nation’s highest legal authority. 

Chief Justice John Roberts said in his judgment that 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.”

What is affirmative action?

Affirmative action is a term that has been synonymous with policies intended to promote racial equality in the United States since its inception in the 1930s. Over the years, this policy has found its applications in various sectors, particularly in higher education. Colleges and universities, including Ivy League institutions like Harvard, Yale, Princeton and Columbia, used affirmative action as a tool to increase the enrolment of Black students and other underrepresented minorities.

What does the ban mean?

This ruling disallows specific methods of considering race while keeping a broader context in mind. However, it does not entirely prohibit the consideration of race. Applicants may still express how their racial identity has influenced their life, but only if it contributes to their unique abilities or character.

The first Supreme Court Justice of Latin descent, Justice Sonia Sotomayor, argued that blocking affirmative action in university admissions undermines diversity initiatives and efforts to confront racism. 

Critics view the decision as a potentially catastrophic blow to the American dream, perpetuating racial inequality and widening the gap between a diverse America and elite colleges.

Supporters of ending the policy argue that affirmative action can create reverse discrimination and foster a culture of entitlement. Rather than encouraging a meritocratic society, affirmative action places undue emphasis on racial background. This has the potential to lower standards and inadvertently foster resentment among those who feel disadvantaged by the system. 

What will be the impact of the reservation ruling in US?

California and other states that had previously outlawed affirmative action in public university admissions have witnessed considerable changes, especially at selective institutions. 

Such affirmative action bans have repercussions that extend into the workplace. A study from Harvard University in 2013 found notable declines in participation among Latino men, Black women, and Asian women in key states that enforced these bans.

Universities now face significant hurdles to achieve racial diversity without affirmative action. Even though alternative methods such as targeted recruitment, financial aid, and test-optional policies can maintain diversity, they are generally less effective.

What will universities do?

Most universities have indicated that they will follow the new federal guidelines but many institutions have stated that they will look for other ways to promote diversity and inclusiveness. 

“Harvard will continue to be a vibrant community whose members come from all walks of life, all over the world,” university President Lawrence Bacow said in a statement following the judgement. Similar sentiments were echoed by other colleges across the country.

What about legacy admissions?

Another point worth mentioning is the controversial practice of legacy admissions, prevalent across US higher education institutions. This process gives preferential treatment to children of alumni during the admission procedure. Advocates argue that it boosts alumni donations and fosters community, while critics view it as a mechanism perpetuating social inequality, often favoring wealthy, white applicants. 

Unlike affirmative action, legacy admissions haven't been banned, mainly due to the legal distinction between race and legacy status. The Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution used to challenge affirmative action does not apply to legacy admissions, as they are not based on race. Nevertheless, the recent ban on affirmative action has reignited conversations around legacy admissions and their impact on diversity and inclusivity within the realm of higher education.