Affirmative
action is now put to rest, as it was voted down for Michigan
colleges. The Supreme Court on Tuesday upheld a Michigan law
banning the use of racial criteria in college admissions, a key
decision in an unfolding legal and political battle nationally over
affirmative action.
Just how beneficial the ban will prove to be, either for those against or those in favor
of affirmative action, remains to be seen
Basically,
the principle of affirmative action is to promote societal
equality through the preferential treatment of socio-economically
disadvantaged people, those
who historically have been disadvantaged due to oppression or slavery. Thus, supporters say the aim of affirmative action is to ensure racial diversity in education and employment.
Diversity
is an encompassing value
that includes racial diversity, and diversity
working in principle,
allows for the inclusion of minorities group:
Blacks,
Hispanics, Asians and American Native Indians.
On
the other hand, giving
preferrential treatment, or accommodating an individual on the basis
of race, as a means to increase diversity in the society, should also not mean excluding those from the mainstream of
society – but it is how critics of affirmative action strongly view it. The
idea itself has brought on a negative connotation that
seems
to impede the active promotion of diversity working
in schools and in the workplace.
Justice
Sonia Sotomayor’s fierce defense of the affirmative action efforts
such as the ones that helped move her from a Bronx housing project to
the upper echelons of American law found renewed voice Tuesday in an
impassioned dissent: “This
refusal to accept the stark reality that race matters is
regrettable,” Sotomayor wrote. “The way to stop discrimination on
the basis of race is to speak openly and candidly on the subject of
race, and to apply the Constitution with eyes open to the unfortunate
effects of centuries of racial discrimination.” Read more at
The aforementioned
article mentions about Sotomayor's highlighting her personal
experience, as a Latina, of benefitting from affirmative action: The search for
minorities to diversify student bodies in the 1970s won her
invitations and scholarship offers from Ivy League schools she had
only just learned existed.
What
impact will this legal ban on affirmative action in the state of Michigan then have on the
rest of the country and education system?
In
a fast-moving legal landscape, selective colleges everywhere face
pressure on a number of fronts to change how they admit students.
The argument resonates at colleges and universities with a
public mission.
“People are focusing on recruiting more
low-income students. They do that because they believe in it,” said
M. Peter McPherson, president of the Association of Public and
Land-grant Universities. “But it also provides a contribution to
diversity.” Read more at
States that forbid affirmative action in higher
education, like Florida and California, as well as Michigan, have
seen a significant drop in the enrollment of black and Hispanic
students in their most selective colleges and universities, the New York Times said in its report. Thus, many fear the trend will continue.
A
study shows a similar finding, and concludes that bans on affirmative
action have had detrimental effects on the representation of people
of color in postsecondary education. Read more at
The
Supreme Court decision, critics say, could bolster similar bans in
seven other states – California, Florida, Washington, Arizona,
Nebraska, Oklahoma and New Hampshire – or impact decisions in
states that are considering similar bans. Supporters
of the affirmative action ban say that all races should be treated
equally, and that giving special treatment to minorities is
tantamount to discrimination. See more here
Another report says that the ruling is viewed as unlikely to have a direct effect on admissions at Iowa's three public universities, which have affirmative action policies regarding employment, but do not consider race and ethnicity in admissions decisions. However, two representatives of minority groups in Iowa expressed concerns about the decision.
None of these debates over the fairness or unfairness of the ban on
affirmative action reveals strong opposition to diversity working; however, it is likely there may be differing
concepts on what
diversity entails, and how it can truly be achieved. This is the reason affirmative action has always been a divisive factor.
Letting diversity work remains an important value to keep in society, but it needs more than policy changes to make most sectors of society become more aware, open-minded, and ready to embrace it.
No comments:
Post a Comment