Race, Harvard and the Supreme Court
The Supreme Court agreed on Jan. 24 to hear suits alleging that race-conscious admissions policies at Harvard and the University of North Carolina are discriminatory against Asian-American students.
The Supreme Court on Monday agreed to hear two cases challenging racial preferences in admissions at Harvard and the University of North Carolina. Kudos to the Justices for taking this opportunity to vindicate equal treatment under the law regardless of race, especially when the left is pushing racial calculations into policies far beyond campus.
This also is a chance for the Court to correct its own mistakes. Racial quotas are forbidden, but in Grutter v. Bollinger (2003), a 5-4 majority endorsed the idea that race could be a “plus” factor to help colleges seek “the educational benefits that flow from a diverse student body.” Yet there was an expiration date: “We expect that 25 years from now, the use of racial preferences will no longer be necessary to further the interest approved today.”
That deadline is almost here. But two decades later the progressive zeal for divvying up people by race, ethnicity and sexuality has increased. Colleges have begun hosting specific graduation events for black, “Latinx” or LGBT students. Some dorms provide optional “affinity housing.” States and hospitals lately have written race into their policies for allocating scarce Covid-19 treatments. The old goal of “equality” is now passe on the left, which wants “equity,” which means unequal treatment in an attempt to achieve equal results.
Read the full piece at the Wall Street Journal here.