A Diverse Supreme Court Grapples with Affirmative Action with Its Justices of Color Split Sharply on the Meaning of ‘Equ

You can order Phone number list discussion
Post Reply
Maruf Hassan
Posts: 1
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2023 9:23 am

A Diverse Supreme Court Grapples with Affirmative Action with Its Justices of Color Split Sharply on the Meaning of ‘Equ

Post by Maruf Hassan »

The United States Supreme Court is deciding a pair of cases that could end affirmative action programs that consider race in college admissions. Though the court is the most diverse in American history – with three justices of color and four women – the conservatives, who have historically opposed affirmative action programs, hold a 6-3 majority. And that majority has the power to ban the use of race when the court issues a decision in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard and Students for Fair Admissions v. University of North Carolina. A decision is expected in June 2023. If the court were to ban affirmative action, the decision would be part of a larger, profound conservative transformation of constitutional law. The court, for example, demonstrated its willingness to reconsider landmark rulings when it overturned the 1973 abortion decision in Roe v. Wade. Justice Clarence Thomas, a leading Black conservative, is a well-known opponent of affirmative action programs and recent decisions by the U.S. Supreme Court that allow the use of race as a factor in college admissions. Thomas’ views are in stark contrast with those of the two other justices of color – Sonia Sotomayor, a Latina, and Ketanji Brown Jackson, a Black woman.

Historical underpinnings of affirmative action Following the Civil War, the nation grappled with building a multiracial democracy. Congress sought to construct that new democracy in part by enacting laws that provided race-conscious remedies. In addition to enacting laws, the nation transformed the U.S. Constitution by adopting the Reconstruction Amendments. These amendments included the 13th Amendment, which ended slavery, and the 15th Amendment, which provides that the right to vote Job Function Email List may not be denied or abridged on “account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.” But it was the the 14th Amendment that addressed discrimination against Black Americans by ensuring that no state may deprive any person “the equal protection of the laws.

Image

Thomas’ opposition to affirmative action In their suits against Harvard and UNC, the anti-affirmative action organization Students for Fair Admissions argues that schools’ race-conscious admissions process violates the constitutional guarantee of equal protection and discriminates against high-achieving Asian American students in favor of traditionally underrepresented Black and Hispanic people. Thomas takes that argument a step further. He has argued that all racial classifications – regardless of their perceived benefit in remedying inequality – are harmful because they stigmatize minorities. A Black man wearing a robe poses for a portrait. U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice Clarence Thomas opposes all race-conscious college admissions policies. Alex Wong/Getty Images Race-conscious admissions policies, he wrote in his dissent of the 2003 Grutter v. Bollinger decision, “stamp minorities with a badge of inferiority.” In addition, Thomas argued that university administrators lack a pressing or compelling reason to divide Americans into racial classes, since African Americans can and will succeed without this help. “Our Constitution is color-blind, and neither knows nor tolerates classes among citizens,” Thomas concluded.
Post Reply