Historic ruling: US Supreme Court corrects "reverse discrimination" in college admissions | race | ruling
June 29th is destined to become a historic moment in the history of the United States Constitution.
On that day, the Supreme Court of the United States made a firm ruling in the Student Fair Admission Organization v. Harvard and the University of North Carolina that the practice of American universities treating racial identity as a basis for admitting students was unconstitutional.
This ruling is of great historical significance as it completely overturns the spirit of affirmative action established in the 1978 case of the University of California Board of Directors v. Bucky.
Previously, the Bucky case had been controversial in American society, and the public was divided into two opposing camps due to differences in their own interests. After the announcement of this ruling, there were still different voices in society, with Republicans cheering and Democrats criticizing the ruling as "violating basic American values.".
Make unconstitutional rulings
In 2014, the conservative organization "Student Fair Admission" filed a lawsuit against Harvard University in the United States District Court in Massachusetts, alleging that Harvard University discriminated against Asian students in the undergraduate admissions process.
The Student Fair Admission Organization is a non-profit organization based in Arlington, Virginia, founded by Edward Blum. In recent decades, he has raised some legal challenges to racially conscious admission policies and voting rights laws.
On October 1, 2019, after a three-week trial, the Boston District Court ruled that Harvard University did not discriminate and its consideration of race met the long-standing precedent of the Supreme Court. SFFA appealed the decision. On November 12, 2020, the First Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the district court's ruling and confirmed the verdict on all charges against Harvard. The SFFA has once again appealed the decision, this time by the United States Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court of the United States. According to Xinhua News Agency
Harvard University and the University of North Carolina are designated defendants, and if SFFA wins, the court's ruling will affect all colleges and universities across the country that consider race as one of the many factors in the admissions process. The SFFA has requested the court to overturn long-standing precedents and prohibit consideration of race in admissions.
Harvard University also gave examples to illustrate how they considered racial factors during their admission period.
This year, there are 61000 applicants competing for less than 2000 admission slots to Harvard University. This process involves a comprehensive review of each applicant, which may take several months to complete. Admissions officials review and consider a range of information, including academic achievements and extracurricular activities. A diversity committee composed of 40 people also considers personal papers, suggestions from teachers and mentors, and interviews with applicants. Race is a factor that considers how applicants stand out and what they may bring to the Harvard community.
In the end, a US court ruled that the admissions committees of both universities violated the equal protection provisions of the Constitution. The Supreme Court's vote in the University of North Carolina case was 6-3, while the vote in the Harvard case was 6-2. Among them, liberal judge Ketangi Brown Jackson did not participate in the Harvard case ruling due to recusal.
According to Xinhua News Agency citing the Associated Press, when Chief Justice John Roberts read out the ruling, the atmosphere in court was heavy, and most of the justices remained expressionless.
Clarence Thomas and KatAngie Brown Jackson, who was only appointed to the Supreme Court by Biden a year ago, are the only two black justices who hold opposite positions on the existence or abolition of the Equal Rights Act. The former believes that although the bill benefits African American students in the United States, it comes at the cost of discriminating against Asian communities and harming their interests. "Racism cannot be eliminated with different or more forms of racism," he emphasized in his speech.
According to Jackson, this ruling is "absolutely tragic for all of us.". She believed that the ruling on that day advocated the principle of "ignoring skin color differences" in law, but "this may not necessarily be the case in life"; Requesting college admissions to not consider racial factors is actually a blind eye to the differential treatment of related races in reality.
Tracing Historical Judgments
All of this starts with an exam in the United States in 1972.
At the age of 31, Alan Bucky had already retired from the United States Marine Corps. Faced with the pain of his comrades during the war, he had the idea of becoming a doctor. In his spare time, he began to pursue pre medical courses and ultimately completed them with excellent grades. In the scientific knowledge section, his accuracy rate is 97%; In terms of language ability, his accuracy rate is 96%; In the mathematics section, his accuracy rate is 94%.
However, at the end of 1972, Bucky formally submitted his 1973 admission application to the University of California, Davis School of Medicine, but it was rejected. Originally, Bucky thought he was rejected because he was over 30 years old, but later he found out that out of the 100 admission spots in medical school that year, 16 special spots were specifically allocated to black and other minority students, and the vast majority of them had GPA and MCAT scores far below his own. This made Bucky extremely dissatisfied.
After multiple unsuccessful complaints, Bucky filed a lawsuit against the University of California in the district court, accusing it of engaging in reverse racial discrimination and violating the Civil Rights Act and the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution's provisions on equal legal protection for citizens.
The University of California and Bucky have been going back and forth, suing the Supreme Court. This matter is also quite tricky for the US Supreme Court, as it is not a simple legal issue, but a highly complex political one.
The Supreme Court of the United States. According to Xinhua News Agency
In June 1978, the Supreme Court made a rare double ruling in American constitutional history in the Bucky case by a margin of 5-4 votes. The verdict read by Justice Powell consists of two parts: the first part ruled that the admission quota system established by the University of California was illegal, and that the University of California School of Medicine must admit Alan Bucky; The second part of the ruling states that the University of California has the right to implement special policies that diversify student sources and academic environments on campus. When admitting new students, race can be considered as a factor, but race cannot be the sole factor. This judgment clearly takes into account the political effects of the case.
The decision made by the Supreme Court has a broader social background.
In March 1961, Kennedy issued Executive Order 10925, announcing that the federal government would establish a specialized committee led by Vice President Johnson to oversee equal employment. Kennedy stated in his order that the federal government would "consider and recommend further positive measures to more fully implement non discriminatory national policies," and all businesses or businesses that accept federal government contracts would "take affirmative action to ensure that applicants' employment and employee treatment during employment are not discriminated against based on race, faith, skin color, or nationality.".
Kennedy continued the ideas of Roosevelt and Truman, but took a step forward, viewing equal employment without discrimination as a "national policy" that private businesses must comply with. Two years later, Kennedy proposed a comprehensive civil rights bill. Subsequently, the action expanded to include women, Native Americans, Hispanics, and other ethnic minorities, as well as universities, state agencies, and federal agencies.
However, due to unequal rules, despite having good wishes and sufficient reasons, the actual result is systemic reverse discrimination against white men. In the competitive arena of social survival, some white people have to pay a heavy price for it.
And not only white people are dissatisfied with this policy, but also some ethnic minorities. As a member of the board of directors of the University of California, Connery, who is black, believes that some of the special preferential measures in this policy are actually equivalent to publicly declaring that ethnic minorities are unable to compete with white people in real combat, and can only rely on their ethnicity and skin color to take the lead. This is actually a public derogation of ethnic minorities. What ethnic minorities need is equality and justice, not so-called special care and preferential treatment.
The dispute has not stopped yet
After the Supreme Court made a ruling overturning a historic judgment, the controversy in society seems to have intensified.
After the ruling was announced, Harvard University said in an open letter published on its website that Harvard "remains steadfast" in its commitment to a campus that reflects a wide range of backgrounds and experiences. The letter stresses that "profound and transformative teaching, learning and research depend on the fundamental principle of a community of people with diverse backgrounds, perspectives and life experiences. This principle is as real and relevant today as it was yesterday."
According to the official website of Harvard University
Kevin Goskivitz, President of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, wrote in a letter to the campus that this decision "is not the result we hoped for," but the university will "respect the decision of the Supreme Court and follow its guidance."
In a brief speech at the White House, US President Biden stated that he "strongly and strongly opposes" the ruling, which "could set the country back.". Biden stated that many people mistakenly believe that affirmative action can allow unqualified students to be admitted before qualified students. But this is not the way universities recruit students. Every student must first meet the admission criteria set by the university before the university can consider factors other than grades, such as race.
Many colleges and universities have expressed their disappointment and commitment to campus diversity values.
Columbia University representative Ben Chang stated in a brief statement on the school's website that diversity is the core of university identity. "It reflects the cultural richness of New York City and our mission to promote meaningful interaction and prepare students for changing the world." He added that the university's commitment to these values is "unwavering.".
McCauley from the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, stated in an email to the community on Thursday that they are "deeply disappointed with the court's ruling.". Since the state banned affirmative action 17 years ago, this decision has had little impact on Michigan's colleges and universities.
Stanford University's open letter expresses deep disappointment with today's United States. The Supreme Court's ruling overturned the long-standing practice of racially conscious university admissions to help achieve a diverse student population. Many people in our community are disheartened. Now, our task is to respond in a way that allows Stanford University to continue expanding opportunities and fulfilling our mission in a diverse and constantly changing world.
The Supreme Court of the United States. According to Xinhua News Agency
As the late renowned international expert and American history expert, Professor Ren Donglai of the History Department at Nanjing University, once said, in American society, as white people gradually become a minority and European culture no longer becomes the dominant mainstream culture, and "affirmative action" and other "national policies" that care for minorities are one day completely abolished, how strong ethnic groups coexist with weak ethnic groups in a multicultural environment of mixed race and ethnicity, and how strong groups coexist with weak groups, will be historic changes such as the United States establishing its own constitution, liberating slaves, industrial revolution, new political reform, World War II, Vietnam War, civil rights movement, and the 9/11 incident. A completely new challenge to face afterwards.
