The Guardian (USA)

The supreme court’s blow to US affirmativ­e action is no coincidenc­e

- Eddie R Cole

On Thursday, in a 6-3 decision, the US supreme court ruled against affirmativ­e action in American colleges and universiti­es. The obvious concern now is whether the ruling will significan­tly reduce the number of Black, Latinx, and Indigenous students enrolled at elite institutio­ns. But a more dire reality undergirds the court’s decision: it reflects a decades-long drive to return higher education to white, elite control.

That movement predates affirmativ­e action by at least a century, because no entity impacts American life more than higher education. During the Reconstruc­tion era following emancipati­on, Black people were allowed to advance in political and various other roles, but white powerbroke­rs drew a hard line at higher education. On 28 September 1870 the chancellor of the University of Mississipp­i, John Newton Waddel, declared: “The university will continue to be, what it always has been, an institutio­n exclusivel­y for the education of the white race.”

Waddel was not alone in his appraisal. Following the civil war, many white academic leaders and faculty members believed higher education was designed solely to educate white people. Waddel and other white academics maintained that the University of Mississipp­i’s faculty “never, for a moment, conceived it possible or proper that a Negro should be admitted to its classes, graduated with its honors, or presented with its diplomas”.

Over the past century, Black Americans’ struggles to secure equal educationa­l opportunit­y have always been met with white resistance. The recent lawsuits filed by Students for Fair Admissions – an organizati­on led by anti-affirmativ­e-action activist Edward Blum – against Harvard University and the University of North Carolina are not about academic merit or even the mistreatme­nt of white or Asian American students; they are an extension of this movement to ensure American higher education can be used to maintain social norms.

This is why, in defending affirmativ­e action, the argument for campus diversity falls short. Rather than make wealthy, majority-white campuses more diverse, affirmativ­e action was intended to acknowledg­e and address the nation’s history of racism and atone for past racial harms that disproport­ionately affected descendant­s of enslaved Black people.

This was made plain in 1963 – one of the most racially tumultuous years of the civil rights movement. By summer, John F Kennedy – a Harvard University alumnus in his third year in the White House – was forced to take immediate action about racial segregatio­n, in part because it had become a foreign policy embarrassm­ent to the United States that belied the nation’s stated commit

ment to democracy.

Kennedy sought assistance from many leading administra­tors in American higher education. “I write you personally to seek your help in solving the grave civil rights problems faced by this nation,” Kennedy wrote, on 12 July 1963, to select college presidents and chairs of trustee boards. “The leadership that you and your colleagues show in extending equal educationa­l opportunit­y today will influence American life for decades to come.”

Kennedy explained to academic leaders that the nation’s problems affected “both white and Negro students and their families”. He asked academic leaders to implement “special programs” to address said problems, but did not specify what the programs should be. He deferred to academic leaders to ensure initiative­s were “carried out” toward that goal.

Motivated by Kennedy’s appeal,

Black and majority-white colleges and universiti­es worked together to address racism. By October 1963, racial initiative­s were discussed at meetings of the American Council on Education and the Associatio­n of American Universiti­es. In April 1964, presidents and faculty from Black campuses met at the Massachuse­tts Institute of Technology, which hosted a two-day conference on “Programs to Assist Predominat­ely Negro Colleges and Universiti­es”.

The leaders of wealthy majoritywh­ite campuses committing to numerous programs, most of them focused on Black colleges and universiti­es. The programs – supported by the Rockefelle­r, Ford, Carnegie, and other foundation­s – included new opportunit­ies for Black college faculty to attend summer institutes and graduate schools and created exchange programs between faculty and students on Black and white campuses. Harlan H Hatcher, president of the University of Michigan, explained that his university’s partnershi­p with the Tuskegee Institute “can help them in the developmen­t of a strong liberal arts program. They, in turn, will advise us on the [racial] programs.”

For Michigan and its peer institutio­ns, considerin­g race in college admissions was part of a broad range of affirmativ­e action practices launched in the 1960s. Affirmativ­e action was a comprehens­ive set of programs that sought system-wide change to expand educationa­l opportunit­y. The goal was not to ensure that some Black people could attend a few dozen of the nation’s wealthiest institutio­ns, but instead that there be widespread investment in creating a more equitable higher education system – investing in the Black colleges and universiti­es that long served the people most disenfranc­hised because of the nation’s history of racism.

The blowback was immediate, however. By the 1970s, white academic leaders and foundation officers mostly abandoned their support of Black colleges and universiti­es, and the lasting remnant of that era was racial considerat­ion in admissions on select wealthy, majority-white campuses. That changed with the supreme court’s ruling this week.

The ongoing racial backlash in this country extends beyond affirmativ­e action. We’re witnessing a battle over ideology, and higher education is at the center. The efforts to ban diversity, equity, and inclusion initiative­s; dismantle the faculty tenure system; restrict how aspects of Black history are taught; and withhold billions from Black universiti­es are also part of this sinister movement. The movement limits Black presence, Black thought, and even Black control of Black institutio­ns to return allof academia to white, elitist control. Those seeking control have no desire for higher education – the environmen­t most concerned with solving complex problems – to have any role in redressing the legacy of racism.

The dismissal of race and racism dialogue in higher education should alarm all Americans, because the supreme court decision is not about restrictin­g unfair racial advantage in college admissions – it is about maintainin­g the social inequality that has long restricted most Americans, regardless of their race, while a few are allowed to preserve and maintain their privileged status in society. The result is a weakened university that does not solve racial problems but instead upholds them.

Eddie R Cole is an associate professor of education and history at the University of California, Los Angeles, and the author of The Campus Color Line: College Presidents and the Struggle for Black Freedom

 ?? ?? Students on the University of California, Berkeley, campus on 29 March 2022, in Berkeley, California. Photograph: Eric Risberg/AP
Students on the University of California, Berkeley, campus on 29 March 2022, in Berkeley, California. Photograph: Eric Risberg/AP

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States