Santa Fe New Mexican

White House reversing affirmativ­e action policy

Universiti­es will no longer be encouraged to consider race in admissions as they were under Obama administra­tion

- By Erica L. Green, Matt Apuzzo and Katie Benner

WASHINGTON — The Trump administra­tion said Tuesday that it was abandoning an Obama administra­tion policy that called on universiti­es to consider race as a factor in diversifyi­ng their campuses, signaling that the administra­tion will champion race-blind admissions standards on campuses.

In a joint letter, the Education and Justice department­s announced that they had rescinded seven Obama-era policy directives on affirmativ­e action, which, the department­s said, “advocate policy preference­s and positions beyond the requiremen­ts of the Constituti­on.”

“The executive branch cannot circumvent Congress or the courts by creating guidance that goes beyond the law and — in some instances — stays on the books for decades,” said Devin O’Malley, a Justice Department spokesman.

Striking a softer tone, Education Secretary Betsy DeVos wrote in a separate statement: “The Supreme Court has determined what affirmativ­e action policies are constituti­onal, and the court’s written decisions are the best guide for navigating this complex issue. Schools should continue to offer equal opportunit­ies for all students while abiding by the law.”

The Trump administra­tion’s moves come with affirmativ­e action at a crossroads. Hard-liners in the Justice and Education department­s are moving against any use of race as a measuremen­t of diversity in education. And the

retirement of Justice Anthony Kennedy at the end of this month will leave the Supreme Court without its swing vote on affirmativ­e action while allowing President Donald Trump to nominate a justice opposed to policies that for decades have tried to integrate elite educationa­l institutio­ns.

A highly anticipate­d case is pitting Harvard against Asian-American students who say one of the nation’s most prestigiou­s institutio­ns has systematic­ally excluded some Asian-American applicants to maintain slots for students of other races. That case is clearly aimed at the Supreme Court.

“The whole issue of using race in education is being looked at with a new eye in light of the fact that it’s not just white students being discrimina­ted against, but Asians and others as well,” said Roger Clegg, the president and general counsel of the conservati­ve Center for Equal Opportunit­y. “As the demographi­cs of the country change, it becomes more and more problemati­c.”

Democrats and civil rights organizati­ons denounced the administra­tion’s decisions. Rep. Nancy Pelosi of California, the House Democratic leader, said the “rollback of vital affirmativ­e action guidance offends our nation’s values” and called it “yet another clear Trump administra­tion attack on communitie­s of color.”

Guidance documents like those rescinded Tuesday do not have the force of law, but they amount to the official view of the federal government. School officials who keep their race-conscious admissions policies intact would do so knowing that they could face a Justice Department investigat­ion or lawsuit, or lose funding from the Education Department.

The Obama administra­tion believed that students benefited from being surrounded by diverse classmates, so in 2011, the administra­tion offered schools a potential road map to establishi­ng affirmativ­e action policies and race-based considerat­ions that could withstand legal scrutiny from an increasing­ly skeptical Supreme Court.

In a pair of policy guidance documents issued in 2011, the Obama Education and Justice department­s informed elementary and secondary schools and college campuses of “the compelling interests” establishe­d by the Supreme Court to achieve diversity. They concluded that the court “has made clear such steps can include taking account of the race of individual students in a narrowly tailored manner.”

But Trump Justice Department officials identified those documents as particular­ly problemati­c and full of “hypothetic­als” designed to allow schools to skirt the law.

The Trump administra­tion’s decision returned the government’s policies to the George W. Bush era. The administra­tion did not formally reissue the Bushera guidance but in recent days did repost a Bush administra­tion affirmativ­e action policy document online. That document states, “The Department of Education strongly encourages the use of race-neutral methods for assigning students to elementary and secondary schools.” For several years, that document had been replaced by a note declaring that the policy had been withdrawn.

The Education Department had last reaffirmed its position on affirmativ­e action in schools in 2016 after a Supreme Court ruling said schools could consider race as one factor among many. In that case, Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin, a white woman claimed she was denied admission because of her race.

“It remains an enduring challenge to our nation’s education system to reconcile the pursuit of diversity with the constituti­onal promise of equal treatment and dignity,” Kennedy wrote for the 4-3 majority.

Some colleges, such as Duke and Bucknell universiti­es, said they would wait to see how the Education Department proceeds in issuing new guidance. Other colleges said they would proceed with diversifyi­ng their campuses as the Supreme Court intended.

Melodie Jackson, a Harvard spokeswoma­n, said the university would “continue to vigorously defend its right, and that of all colleges and universiti­es, to consider race as one factor among many in college admissions, which has been upheld by the Supreme Court for more than 40 years.”

A spokeswoma­n for the University of Michigan, which won a major Supreme Court case in 2003, suggested that the flagship university would like more freedom to consider race, not less. But it is already constraine­d by state law. After the case, Michigan voters enacted a constituti­onal ban on race-conscious college admissions policies.

“We believe the U.S. Supreme Court got it right in 2003 when it affirmed our law school’s approach at the time, which allowed considerat­ion of race as one of many factors in the admissions process,” said Kim Broekhuize­n, the Michigan spokeswoma­n. “We still believe that.”

Attorney General Jeff Sessions has indicated that he will take a tough line against such views. Federal prosecutor­s will investigat­e and sue universiti­es over discrimina­tory admissions policies, he said.

But a senior Justice Department official denied that these decisions were rolling back protection­s for minorities. He said they were instead hewing the department closer to the letter of the law. In the department­s’ letter, officials wrote that “the protection­s from discrimina­tion on the basis of race remain in place.”

“The department­s are firmly committed to vigorously enforcing these protection­s on behalf of all students,” the letter said.

Anurima Bhargava, who headed civil rights enforcemen­t in schools for the Justice Department under President Barack Obama and helped write that administra­tion’s guidance, said the policy withdrawal was timed for brief filings in the Harvard litigation, due at the end of the month.

“This is a wholly political attack,” Bhargava said. “And our schools are the place where our communitie­s come together, so our schools have to continue to promote diversity and address segregatio­n, as the U.S. Constituti­on demands.”

Catherine Lhamon, who served as the Education Department’s head of civil rights under Obama, called the department­s’ move confusing.

“There’s no reason to rethink or reconsider this, as the Supreme Court is the highest court in the land and has spoken on this issue,” Lhamon said.

On Friday, the Education Department began laying the groundwork for the shift, when it restored on its civil rights website the Bush-era guidance. Conservati­ve advocacy groups saw that as promising. Clegg, of the Center for Equal Opportunit­y, said that preserving the Obama-era guidance would be akin to “the FBI issuing a document on how you can engage in racial profiling in a way where you won’t get caught.”

DeVos has seemed hesitant to wade in on the fate of affirmativ­e action policies, which date back to a 57-year-old executive order by President John F. Kennedy, who recognized systemic and discrimina­tory disadvanta­ges for women and minorities.

The Education Department did not partake in the Justice Department’s formal interest in Harvard’s litigation.

“I think this has been a question before the courts, and the courts have opined,” DeVos told the Associated Press.

But DeVos’ new head of civil rights, Kenneth Marcus, may disagree. A vocal opponent of affirmativ­e action, Marcus was confirmed last month on a party-line Senate vote, and it was Marcus who signed Tuesday’s letter.

 ?? ASSOCIATED PRESS FILE PHOTO ?? Education Secretary Betsy DeVos testifies in May before a House committee in Washington. The Trump administra­tion is rescinding Obama-era guidance that encouraged schools to take race into account in admissions.
ASSOCIATED PRESS FILE PHOTO Education Secretary Betsy DeVos testifies in May before a House committee in Washington. The Trump administra­tion is rescinding Obama-era guidance that encouraged schools to take race into account in admissions.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States