Affirmative ActionAffirmative Action
The Pressure against Racial Preferences Builds
- Details
- Published Date
- Written by Roger Clegg
There’s an excellent discussion here of “Originalism and the Colorblind Constitution,” by Professor Michael Rappaport. The bottom line (quoting the abstract): “In addition to arguing that the evidence for the constitutionality of affirmative action under the 14th Amendment’s original meaning is weak, the Article also contends that there is relatively substantial originalist evidence in favor of the colorblind Constitution.” I came to a similar conclusion here.
Just Say NO to Racial Preferences
- Details
- Published Date
- Written by Roger Clegg
The New York Times must really be afraid that the Supreme Court is about to do the right thing in Fisher v. University of Texas, in which the use of racial preferences in university admissions is challenged. It ran an op-ed two Sundays ago that discusses the pending decision and acknowledges that, despite schools’ claims that race is considered as just one among many factors, it is in fact given huge weight today. This is despite warnings from the Court already (in 1978 and 2003) that the heavy and mechanical use of race is unacceptable.
For once, the New York Times is right!
- Details
- Published Date
- Written by Roger Clegg
Earlier this year, the New York Times ran an editorial titled, “The Affirmative Action War Goes On.” Well, for once it’s right: That war does continue.
Racial Preferences before the Supreme Court
- Details
- Published Date
- Written by Roger Clegg
Most of my work last week was related to Fisher v. University of Texas, the challenge to racial preferences in university admissions in which the Center for Equal Opportunity has played such a key role, and which was argued last Wednesday before the Supreme Court.
I did an analysis of the oral argument for ScotusBlog – you can read the whole thing here, but here’s an excerpt:
Discriminating Eye
- Details
- Published Date
- Written by Roger Clegg
There was a dubious Associated Press story over the weekend about how California public universities are having to struggle to achieve “diversity”—defined as a student body that reflects the general population of the state—since Proposition 209 banned racial preferences in admissions there in 1996. (Center for Equal Opportunity studies documenting discrimination there helped pass that initiative, btw.)
Bean Counting in the Big Apple (and Elsewhere)
- Details
- Published Date
- Written by Roger Clegg
The City University of New York has decided to add a “White/Jewish” classification to its list of “minority” faculty categories. The full list: “African-American/black, Asian, White/Jewish,Lesbian/Gay/Bisexual/Transgender, Hispanic/Latino, Individuals withdisabilities, and Italian-American.” The move does not seem to bewell-received, according to the New York Post: “Jewish professors told The Post that marking them as Jews won’t make them the chosen people on campus — and may even shrink their ranks if Jews are found to be ‘overrepresented.’”Read all about it here.
Affirmative Action Questions for the Candidates
- Details
- Published Date
- Written by Roger Clegg
With the Supreme Court set now—in an election year— to revisit the issue of racial preferences in university admissions, the various political candidates need to be ready for questions regarding their stance on affirmative action. Here are my suggested Q’s and A’s (originally posted on National Review Online here):
Bad Guidance on Racial Preferences
- Details
- Published Date
- Written by Roger Clegg
As the K–12 school year draws to a close, school boards and superintendents will have to decide about tweaking student assignments for the fall. As they do so, they will also have to decide how much weight to give to the Obama administration’s “Guidance on the Voluntary Use of Race to Achieve Diversity and Avoid Racial Isolation in Elementary and Secondary Schools,” which was released jointly late last year by the Education and Justice Departments. The guidance encourages schools to consider students’ race and ethnicity in deciding who goes to which school.
Back to Madison!
- Details
- Published Date
- Written by Roger Clegg
The Center for Equal Opportunity went back to Madison, Wisconsin, this week! Our studies revealing the heavy weight given to race and ethnicity in undergrad and law school admissions at the University of Wisconsin prompted a hearing at the state legislature. The chairman of the relevant committee is no friend of this kind of discrimination, and we were asked to testify. The hearings went very well, and you can read my testimony on ceo’s website at www.ceousa.org .
As you know, our earlier visit to Wisconsin last month was a great success. With the protestors, politically correct university officials, and all the media excitement, CEO’s studies got lots of publicity, and the issue of racial and ethnic admissions preferences is now clearly on the front burner in the Badger State.
