Progressives erupt over affirmative action ruling

Progressives are appalled at the Supreme Court’s decision to strike down affirmative action, a move they see as undermining their decades-long push for diversity and inclusion in the higher education system.

The court’s 6-3 ruling Thursday put liberals on the defensive, arguing that another marker of social advancement for underrepresented communities had been thwarted by a conservative majority.  

“The Supreme Court has yet again taken us back in time by barring institutions of higher education from using race-conscious admissions policies,” said Rep. Jamaal Bowman (D-N.Y.), a prominent education advocate and former school principal.

The decision concluded that admissions committees at Harvard University and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill used discriminatory practices when considering both Asian American and white applicants.

But progressives defended the process as a way to safeguard protections for predominantly Black and Latino prospective students. 

“These policies are critical to ensuring that our Black and brown students, who have already experienced redlining and systemic underinvestment in their schools and communities, have an equitable shot at higher education to pursue their dreams,” Bowman said.

Rep. Summer Lee (D-Pa.), a newly elected member of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, levied a stronger critique, linking her personal path to obtaining a college diploma to what she described as intentional cruelty from a “corrupt” court.

“As a Black woman who had the audacity to attend college, I am disgusted that our country just enshrined racial inequity in higher education and economic immobility into law,” Lee wrote.

“Make no mistake — this decision by this corrupt and illegitimate Supreme Court was *designed* to keep a generation of brilliant Black young people out of higher education and positions of power,” she continued. “The people whose great grandparents were enslaved are the young people who will be shackled by this decision. The cruelty is the point.”

Leaders from the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus, Black Caucus, and Hispanic Caucus issued a joint statement sharply condemning the ruling, one of several that Democrats had been eagerly awaiting in June.

Rep. Cori Bush (D-Mo.), who has been vocal about social justice issues in Congress, said that the move will have long-standing negative implications for future applicants.

“Ending affirmative action in higher education — which the Court had already held to be legal — will have devastating impacts on our communities,” Bush wrote in a statement, adding that the court has “once again rolled back protections for people in marginalized communities across this country.”

The ruling has opened up fresh questions about how many students from diverse backgrounds will apply to colleges in future cycles. 

Chief Justice John Roberts made clear the Supreme Court’s position in writing his majority opinion. He argued that the two universities had admissions guidelines that were at odds with the 14th Amendment’s guarantee of equal protection.

“Both programs lack sufficiently focused and measurable objectives warranting the use of race, unavoidably employ race in a negative manner, involve racial stereotyping, and lack meaningful end points,” Roberts wrote. “We have never permitted admissions programs to work in that way, and we will not do so today.”

Shortly after the majority ruling was made public, Democrats and affirmative action proponents were quick to rally in opposition. Liberals argue the majority of justices are pretending that discrimination is not an ongoing problem in higher education, but rather a relic of the past.

In offering a detailed dissent that was shared broadly among civil rights leaders and activists throughout the day, liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote that the Supreme Court “cements a superficial rule of colorblindness as a constitutional principle in an endemically segregated society where race has always mattered and continues to matter.”

“The Court subverts the constitutional guarantee of equal protection by further entrenching racial inequality in education, the very foundation of our democratic government and pluralistic society,” she continued.

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, whom President Biden nominated to the court, also wrote a strongly worded dissent.

At the White House, Biden used his bully pulpit to knock the verdict.

“I believe our colleges are stronger when they are racially diverse,” Biden said. “I also believe that while talent, creativity, and hard work are everywhere across this country, not equal opportunity.  It is not everywhere across this country.”

He also struck several populist notes during his address, emphasizing the potential socioeconomic consequences of the ruling. In using language common to left-wing activists, Biden implied that the court was deciding in favor of students with more resources and hurting those with fewer advantages.

“Today for too many schools the only people who benefit from the system are the wealthy and the well connected,” Biden said. “The odds have been stacked against working people for much too long. We need a higher education system that works for everyone.”

While many progressives shared Biden’s sentiments, not all Democrats have been impressed by the administration’s ability to take on bigger fights around race and inequality from the executive branch.

“Politically speaking, Biden will acknowledge the ruling, express disappointment, and move on,” said one Democratic strategist.

Still, the president offered a degree of optimism, signaling that much more needs to be done to make education fairer and more inclusive. His comments were a nod to the broader framework that has guided his first-term presidency and early reelection effort. 

“We cannot let this decision be the last word,” Biden said. “The court can render a decision but it cannot change what America stands for.”

“Discrimination still exists in America,” he added. “Today’s decision has not changed that.”