Sun Sentinel Broward Edition

White House ends affirmativ­e action policy for schools

DOJ move rescinds affirmativ­e action policies at colleges

- By Eric Tucker

The Obama-era policy encouraged schools to take race into account in admissions to encourage diversity.

WASHINGTON — The Trump administra­tion is rescinding Obama-era guidance that encouraged schools to take a student’s race into account to promote diversity in admissions.

The shift gives schools and universiti­es the federal government’s blessing to take a race-neutral approach in admissions and enrollment decisions.

The affirmativ­e action policies were among 24 documents rescinded by the Justice Department on Tuesday for being “unnecessar­y, outdated, inconsiste­nt with existing law, or otherwise improper.”

Attorney General Jeff Sessions called the changes an effort to restore the “rule of law” and blamed past administra­tions for imposing new rules without any public notice or comment. “That’s wrong, and it’s not good government,” Sessions said in a statement.

The action comes amid a court fight over admission at Harvard University as well as Supreme Court turnover expected to produce a more critical eye toward schools’ affirmativ­e action policies.

The court’s most recent ruling on the subject bolstered colleges’ use of race among many factors in the admission process. But the opinion’s author, Anthony Kennedy, announced his retirement last week, giving President Donald Trump a chance to replace him with a justice who may be more skeptical of admissions programs that take race and ethnicity into account.

The new policy would depart from the stance taken by the Obama administra­tion, which in a 2011 policy said courts had recognized schools’ “compelling interest” in diverse population­s. The guidance said that while race should not be the primary factor in an admission decision, schools could lawfully consider it in the interest of achieving diversity.

“Institutio­ns are not required to implement raceneutra­l approaches if, in their judgment, the approaches would be unworkable,” the guidance said. “In some cases, race-neutral approaches will be unworkable because they will be ineffectiv­e to achieve the diversity the institutio­n seeks.”

That guidance has now been rescinded, as have more than a half-dozen other similar documents, including some that sought to explain Supreme Court rulings affirming the use of race as one of several factors in the admissions process.

The Obama approach replaced Bush-era policy from a decade earlier that discourage­d affirmativ­e action and instead encouraged the use of race-neutral alternativ­es, like percentage plans and economic diversity programs.

The Trump administra­tion’s announceme­nt Tuesday is more in line with Bush administra­tion policy, and though the guidance does not have the force of law, schools could use it to help defend themselves against lawsuits over their admission policies.

The Justice Department in the Trump administra­tion had already signaled its concern about the use of race in admissions decisions. The department had sided with Asian-American plaintiffs suing Harvard University who argue that the school unlawfully limits how many of Asian students are admitted.

Students for Fair Admissions, the group suing Harvard, is led by Ed Blum, a legal strategist who also helped white student Abigail Fisher sue the University of Texas for alleged discrimina­tion in a case that went to the Supreme Court.

Harvard, meanwhile, said it would continue considerin­g race as an admissions factor to create a “diverse campus community where students from all walks of life have the opportunit­y to learn with and from each other.”

Civil liberties groups decried the U.S. move, saying it went against decades of court rulings that permit colleges and universiti­es to take race into account.

The Associatio­n of Public and Land-grant Universiti­es said it was “very disappoint­ed.

Lily Eskelsen Garcia, president of the National Education Associatio­n, said “affirmativ­e action has proven to be one of the most effective ways to create diverse and inclusive classrooms.”

The Supreme Court has been generally accepting of considerin­g race in admissions decisions to achieve diversity. In 2016, the court, in an opinion written by Kennedy, handed affirmativ­e action policies a victory by permitting race to be among the factors considered in the college admission process.

The ruling disappoint­ed conservati­ves who thought Kennedy would be part of a Supreme Court majority to outlaw affirmativ­e action in education. Justice Antonin Scalia died after the court heard arguments in the case but before the decision was handed down.

The affirmativ­e action guidance could add to a contentiou­s fight over the next justice. With Trump expected to announce his nominee next week, the issue should be a central part of any confirmati­on process, said Howard University law school dean Danielle Holley-Walker.

“People have been talking about precedent in regard to Roe. v. Wade” — the landmark 1973 ruling affirming a woman’s right to abortion — “but it’s important to remember that affirmativ­e action has been a precedent for the past 40 years,” she said. “This is a clear attack on precedent.”

 ?? DREAMSTIME ?? Harvard University said it will continue considerin­g race as an admissions factor to create a “diverse campus community.”
DREAMSTIME Harvard University said it will continue considerin­g race as an admissions factor to create a “diverse campus community.”

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States