Commentary
-
Our commentary partners will help you reach your own conclusions on complex topics.
New Rule. White men are not allowed to talk about affirmative action. Not ever, unless they know what the heck they’re talking about. Most don’t. But that doesn’t stop them, of course from spouting off about a topic that they don’t fully understand. In the nearly 40 years that I’ve discussed and written about preferential treatment of college admissions, as opposed to an employment or government contracts, I’ve heard white men spin some fantastical yarns.
Affirmative action is not “reverse discrimination” as they claim. Nor is it part of some massive conspiracy to oppress white men. Affirmative action does not amount to admitting people to college based on race or ethnicity alone. And nor is a kind of cosmic bureaucratic payback for past sins.
Expect to hear more madness in the weeks and months to come. The Supreme Court recently heard arguments in the case, Students for Fair Admissions v. President and Fellows of Harvard College. Plaintiffs accused Harvard of discriminating against Asians. Rubbish. Asians made up 25.9% of the Harvard class admitted in 2021.
White conservatives such as radio host Hugh Hewitt, say Harvard wants to “limit the upward mobility of Asian Americans via the imposition of caps on their admission.” More rubbish. Harvard is a private institution. It’s allowed to make decisions on what it wants its student body to look like. If it decides it doesn’t want a student body that’s 70% Asian, or 70% Latino or 70% Black, for that matter, that’s fair enough. That’s its right.
Two lower federal courts have already ruled in Harvard’s favor, and the amicus briefs submitted on the university’s behalf, included one from the Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund. It rejects the idea that affirmative action hurts Asians and claims that race-neutral admissions “ultimately benefits white applicants.”
Let’s back up a beat and define affirmative action…that I should describe my personal history with the concept. Affirmative action is more than 60 years old. It was on March 6, 1961, that President John F. Kennedy signed Executive Order 10925. It required that U.S. government contractors take “affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed, and that employees are treated during employment without regard to their race, creed, color, or national origin.”
Americans have argued about the concept ever since. Three times over the last six decades, the Supreme Court has given colleges and universities permission to take the race ethnicity of applicants into account, as long as it’s just one factor among many in the admissions process.
In 1978, in Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, the justices struck down a quota at UC-Davis Medical School, but said race could be considered. In 2003, in Grutter v. Bollinger, the Court upheld the admissions policy at the University of Michigan Law School. In 2016 in Fisher v. University of Texas, the justices decided it was okay for UT-Austin to consider race and mission.
My own personal relationship with affirmative action goes back to the fall of 1984, when I was a 17-year-old high school senior. As a Mexican-American with perfect grades and advanced placement courses, I was accepted by five elite universities, including Harvard, which I would eventually attend. This inspired white friends whose grades weren’t as good as mine, to tell me that I would not have been admitted had I not been Mexican.
For a long time I stood by affirmative action, maybe out of loyalty, but over the last 20 years, not so much. Gradually, I’ve become convinced that when applied to0 aggressively, a program that was intended to benefit Latinos and African-Americans can actually hurt them. It labels beneficiaries as unqualified, lowers academic standards, and masks the failures of the K-12 public schools to properly educate black and brown students.
Get it straight. Affirmative action is not an attack on whites and Asians. It’s a band-aid on a bullet wound. It’s time to pull off the bandage and heal the patient, once and for all.
-
White identity politics scores another win
Our identities — and how we perceive the identities of others — have helped to inform, define and construct human politics for thousands of years. In its modern American form, “identity politics” is essentially the belief “that the most profound and potentially most radical politics come directly out of our own identity.” Identity politics is… -
Trump’s Latino gains were beyond my imagination
President-elect Donald Trump won 46% of the Latino vote, boosting his support among this demographic by double digits compared to 2020. He carried all seven battleground states, driven by strong Latino support in key states like Arizona, Nevada, Pennsylvania and Georgia. Watch as Straight Arrow News contributor Ruben Navarrette breaks down the factors behind Trump’s… -
Newsom has it right, legacy admissions have to go
The recent decision from the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) to end affirmative action quotas in U.S. university applications and admissions met a mixed reception among the American public, with some celebrating the decision and others dissenting against it. Even among those who welcomed the end of affirmative action, however, many criticized the… -
Why Harris lost so many Latino voters
With Latinos making up 15% of eligible U.S. voters, both Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump are intensely focused on securing their support. Long-term trends suggest that Latino men may be shifting toward the Right, while Latina women remain more strongly aligned with the Democratic camp. Despite Harris holding a majority of… -
NYC Mayor Eric Adams doesn’t belong in politics
On Sept. 26, 2024, the Southern District of New York unsealed indictment charges against New York City Mayor Eric Adams, including charges of bribery, corruption and campaign finance violations. Adams’ defense insists that no credible evidence exists for any of these charges, but recent public opinion surveys show that a majority of New York City…
Latest Opinions
-
News headlines compared: Did Trump win by a landslide?
-
World’s first carbon capture facility powered by wind energy coming to TX
-
Conor McGregor ordered to pay $257K over sexual assault case
-
Study on link between COVID-19 and cancer causes buzz online
-
Researchers hope PigeonBot flying robot can inspire next generation of flight
Popular Opinions
-
In addition to the facts, we believe it’s vital to hear perspectives from all sides of the political spectrum.