The public reaction to the end of affirmative action and college university admissions was like the dog that didn’t bark or protest or complain or pushback or raise hell. What happened? Why wasn’t there more of an outcry when those who oppose taking race into account to ease racial inequity finally succeeded in toppling a policy they never liked? Not from the beginning? Well, I have a theory. Before I share it. Here’s a reminder of how we got here. It’s been nearly three months since the majority of the Supreme Court made up of six conservative justices bought in to the fantastical argument offered up by the conservative activist group students for fair admissions. The group claim that Asians who make up between 20 and 30% of the student population at many top universities are the new oppressed minority in suing Harvard and the University of North Carolina over their admissions policies. Plaintiffs demanded a colorblind process and a decision head down at the end of June, the right wing justices obliged, disregarding the facts and the law, they let politics be their guide in striking down the practice. Supporters of affirmative action predicted that people of color especially Latinos and African Americans would take to the streets and express their outrage, why they might even it was speculated, take their complaints directly to the steps of the Supreme Court and put the spotlight on the Judiciary. What happened? Not much, there was nary a whimper in response to this really momentous Supreme Court decision. Frankly, I myself expected more. Affirmative Action college admissions is a big deal. It’s been around for almost 60 years, starting up a few years after affirmative action contracting began in 1961. It was in 1970s, and 80s, considered a very controversial topic. But time passes and passions cool. In 2023, there are now at least three generations that have come along since the invention of affirmative action, Generation X, the millennials, and Generation Z. Why do you suppose affirmative action means so little to most of the people in those groups who are now between the ages of 15 and 55? Well, these generations never bought into affirmative action, and so they’re not invested in it. It was probably much different in the 1970s. When Black and Brown members of the baby boom now in their 70s, or the silent generation now in their 80s used affirmative action to break into the police department or state government, or maybe even a corporate job. They usually felt grateful for the opportunity and they created affirmative action for the break. By the time I entered the job market after college in the 1990s, the drawbridge had come up a bit. Corporations, media companies, law firms and alike had figured out they have to lower standards in order to sprinkle a little color in their workplace. They could just continue to hire badass super qualified people, including a few minorities here and there and call it macaroni. Consequently, those who got through the gate felt less and less indebted to affirmative action. They knew that they had gotten there on their own steam. And so they didn’t feel like they had to go through life bending the knee to white liberal bureaucrats. And there was another thing, the numbers and percentages, the population of Latinos and African Americans in the United States kept growing over the last 30 years. But only a relative few were admitted to university X or higher bike Corporation. Why? So the constituency of affirmative action began to shrink, relative to the overall non white population in the country. This meant that, unlike the current debate over easing student loan debt, in which 10s of millions of people feel as if they have a personal stake, the debate over whether or not we should preserve affirmative action is confined mainly to the elites at all up and it’s easy to see why, when the Supreme Court gutted affirmative action college admissions, few people were angry. Few people even noticed
Related
Ruben Navarrette
Columnist, host & author
View Video LibraryCommentary
Our commentary partners will help you reach your own conclusions on complex topics.
Why Putin axed Shoigu
Tuesday
Peter Zeihan
New roles for Russia, North Korea, Iran in global arms trade
Monday
Peter Zeihan
Why interest rates will be higher for longer
Friday
Peter Zeihan
‘The worst it’s ever been’: Young Americans on democracy
May 9
Dr. Frank Luntz
Why the lackluster response to affirmative action ruling?
Sep 12, 2023
By Straight Arrow News
The United States Supreme Court recently struck down affirmative action in admissions processes for U.S. colleges and universities. It was the biggest defeat for affirmative action advocates in recent history.
Straight Arrow News contributor Ruben Navarrette remarks on the unimpressive public response to such a historic defeat and explores some of the reasons why the public backlash against the decision has been relatively calm and quiet.
Supporters of affirmative action predicted that people of color, especially Latinos and African Americans, would take to the streets and express their outrage, why they might even, it was speculated, take their complaints directly to the steps of the Supreme Court and put the spotlight on the judiciary.
What happened? Not much. There was nary a whimper in response to this really momentous Supreme Court decision. Frankly, I myself expected more.
Affirmative action college admissions is a big deal. It’s been around for almost 60 years, starting up a few years after affirmative action contracting began in 1961. It was in the 1970s, and 80s, considered a very controversial topic. But time passes and passions cool.
In 2023, there are now at least three generations that have come along since the invention of affirmative action: Generation X, the millennials, and Generation Z. Why do you suppose affirmative action means so little to most of the people in those groups who are now between the ages of 15 and 55? Well, these generations never bought into affirmative action, and so they’re not invested in it.
The public reaction to the end of affirmative action and college university admissions was like the dog that didn’t bark or protest or complain or pushback or raise hell. What happened? Why wasn’t there more of an outcry when those who oppose taking race into account to ease racial inequity finally succeeded in toppling a policy they never liked? Not from the beginning? Well, I have a theory. Before I share it. Here’s a reminder of how we got here. It’s been nearly three months since the majority of the Supreme Court made up of six conservative justices bought in to the fantastical argument offered up by the conservative activist group students for fair admissions. The group claim that Asians who make up between 20 and 30% of the student population at many top universities are the new oppressed minority in suing Harvard and the University of North Carolina over their admissions policies. Plaintiffs demanded a colorblind process and a decision head down at the end of June, the right wing justices obliged, disregarding the facts and the law, they let politics be their guide in striking down the practice. Supporters of affirmative action predicted that people of color especially Latinos and African Americans would take to the streets and express their outrage, why they might even it was speculated, take their complaints directly to the steps of the Supreme Court and put the spotlight on the Judiciary. What happened? Not much, there was nary a whimper in response to this really momentous Supreme Court decision. Frankly, I myself expected more. Affirmative Action college admissions is a big deal. It’s been around for almost 60 years, starting up a few years after affirmative action contracting began in 1961. It was in 1970s, and 80s, considered a very controversial topic. But time passes and passions cool. In 2023, there are now at least three generations that have come along since the invention of affirmative action, Generation X, the millennials, and Generation Z. Why do you suppose affirmative action means so little to most of the people in those groups who are now between the ages of 15 and 55? Well, these generations never bought into affirmative action, and so they’re not invested in it. It was probably much different in the 1970s. When Black and Brown members of the baby boom now in their 70s, or the silent generation now in their 80s used affirmative action to break into the police department or state government, or maybe even a corporate job. They usually felt grateful for the opportunity and they created affirmative action for the break. By the time I entered the job market after college in the 1990s, the drawbridge had come up a bit. Corporations, media companies, law firms and alike had figured out they have to lower standards in order to sprinkle a little color in their workplace. They could just continue to hire badass super qualified people, including a few minorities here and there and call it macaroni. Consequently, those who got through the gate felt less and less indebted to affirmative action. They knew that they had gotten there on their own steam. And so they didn’t feel like they had to go through life bending the knee to white liberal bureaucrats. And there was another thing, the numbers and percentages, the population of Latinos and African Americans in the United States kept growing over the last 30 years. But only a relative few were admitted to university X or higher bike Corporation. Why? So the constituency of affirmative action began to shrink, relative to the overall non white population in the country. This meant that, unlike the current debate over easing student loan debt, in which 10s of millions of people feel as if they have a personal stake, the debate over whether or not we should preserve affirmative action is confined mainly to the elites at all up and it’s easy to see why, when the Supreme Court gutted affirmative action college admissions, few people were angry. Few people even noticed
Related
US college protests test First Amendment limits
Protests against Israel’s alleged genocide in Gaza have spread across university campuses around the globe. While most protests initially coalesced around anti-genocide sentiments and a shared value for human life, some critics have observed slogans, rhetoric and behavior that they claim has become more alarming over time. Accusations have surfaced of “outside agitators” deliberately spoiling…
Tuesday
Arizona bill legalizing shooting migrants is part of GOP brand
In February 2024, Arizona Republicans proposed a bill that would have permitted property owners to murder anyone accused of trespassing on their property. Although the bill did not explicitly mention immigrants, Arizona State Rep. Justin Heap (R) stated in a hearing that the bill aimed to address a perceived loophole through which migrants have moved…
May 8
Republicans unraveling before our very eyes
In less than a year, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., has filed two motions to remove House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La. Her latest motion came after she and other staunch conservative U.S. representatives expressed outrage with Johnson’s management of a $95 billion international defense bill and a $1.2 trillion federal funding bill, which were both…
Apr 30
Trump supporters want to be victims of anti-white racism
The racial anxieties of conservative white Americans are certainly nothing new to U.S. history, but in recent years observers have warned of a range of factors that may be radicalizing right-leaning Americans into political violence and extremism. Donald Trump, in particular, often receives credit for normalizing this extremism for a new generation of Americans. Straight…
Apr 23
Texas is Hispanic, and that’s not going to change
Hispanic people now make up the largest ethnic group in Texas, according to the latest U.S. census data, and almost half of all minors in the state are Hispanic or Latino. This data feeds the fears of some right-wing Americans who believe in the “great replacement” theory. The theory states that non-white populations are displacing…
Apr 16
Underreported stories from each side
Biden administration preparing to hand out 10K migrant ID cards in several US cities: report
14 sources | 0% from the left
Reuters
GOP Sen. Mitt Romney says Biden should have pardoned Trump
12 sources | 17% from the right
Reuters
Latest Stories
Neuralink knew of issues with brain implant for years: Report
Watch 1:56
23 mins ago
NATO needs options to deal with deadly drones. Here are two.
Watch 6:56
1 hr ago
US-built pier for humanitarian aid anchored in Gaza
Watch 0:54
4 hrs ago
Slovakia’s prime minister in serious condition after assassination attempt
Watch 0:57
4 hrs ago
Putin meets with Xi in China as leaders look to strengthen ties
Watch 6:33
6 hrs ago
Popular Opinions
In addition to the facts, we believe it’s vital to hear perspectives from all sides of the political spectrum.
Universities must blame themselves for protest hypocrisy
1 hr ago
Timothy Carney
It’s okay for Met Gala celebrities to avoid politics
2 hrs ago
Jordan Reid
Biden sees Trump jail time as sole path to reelection
Yesterday
Newt Gingrich
Why the United States must regulate ghost guns
Yesterday
Adrienne Lawrence