Affirmative Action: The Ongoing Discussion of “Individuality”

People gathering before the Dr. Martin Luther King Jr, “I Have a Dream” plaque, 40 years after the 1963 Civil Rights March. Photo by Elvert Barnes Protest Photography. 

The constitutionality of affirmative action is once again challenged in the current American political world. Through Supreme Court cases such as Students for Fair Admissions v. President and Fellows of Harvard College and Students for Fair Admissions v. University of North Carolina, the practice has faced an array of legal challenges. Affirmative action is the commitment within organizations and the government to expand the scope of exclusiveness of previously underrepresented spaces such as education and employment. Affirmative action can be based on factors such as gender, nationality, race, and sexuality. It is the practice of providing increased opportunities to those that have been historically underserved.

Opponents of affirmative action argue that the Equal Employment Opportunities Commission, which led to the emphasized importance of affirmative action policies, categorizes Americans strictly by their racial groups. These individuals feel as though establishing non-discriminatory access to underrepresented groups represents a “demeaning, dehumanizing idea of reducing individuals to racial and ethnic categories.” These opponents believe that the Commission simply created the path for “quotas, and the acceptance of the principle that it is lawful to discriminate in favor of certain racial groups to achieve social justice.” Furthermore, opponents of affirmative action argue that the Supreme Court should find the practice of affirmative action unconstitutional—what they conceive as a step in the path to reinstitute individual freedom and dignity. 

Contrary to what its opposition claims, however, the practice of affirmative action is in fact the effort of educational and professional institutions all across the country to try and remedy the racial injustices that minorities have inherited. In the effort to achieve true equity for these minorities, the comprehensive application of affirmative action should be prioritized. Although students of color continue to be underrepresented on university campuses, diversity derived from affirmative action increases all students’ educational opportunities, centers around factors other than income, and promotes a vast scope of social versatility. There must be ongoing implementation of affirmative action policy in educational settings.

A CASE STUDY IN AFFIRMATIVE ACTION 

When addressing the discussion of affirmative action in the college admissions setting, Mark C. Long of the University of Washington and Nicole A. Bateman of the Brookings Institution examined the effects of the ethnic and racial configurations in universities that have placed a ban on affirmative action policies in their admissions process. In their research, Long and Bateman use the University of California, Berkeley as a model for their examination. Their findings directly challenge the concept of equal representation within a university’s student body. In the two decades after the affirmative action ban, a disproportionately low percentage of students from underrepresented minorities such as Black, Hispanic, and Native American groups, graduated from high school in California and enrolled in a university within the UC school system. This particular study illustrates that a ban on affirmative action further hurts minority students, leading to a deficiency in the ability of these public high school graduates to matriculate to a public, in-state university. Given the absence of race in the college admissions process as part of the ban, schools in the University of California system have attempted to use other factors of data to identify underrepresented students, but have failed in their attempts. Census data and family income were the two main factors used to identify these insufficiently represented students, and yet, there is still a 23% deficit between the amount of freshmen and high school graduates within certain groups of these students. The University of California school system does not even remotely reflect the overall ethnic diversity of the state itself. In fact, it is the lack of substantial policy intervention fighting for the rights of students through affirmative action that allowed for such disproportionate outcomes to occur, preventing a true representation of the actual demographic of high school graduates in California. Race and ethnicity should not be considered as barriers to individual dignity, but as components of how to make those historically discriminated against equal today.

The consequences of the absence of affirmative action are also noticeably present in medical schools. Research on racial diversity in the medical profession has found that “affirmative action bans have led to about a 17% decline (from 18.5% to 15.3%) in the first-time matriculation of medical school students who are underrepresented students of color.” Medical schools in states that must adhere to policies banning the consideration of race and ethnicity in graduate admissions now pose serious obstacles for the medical profession, and other post-undergraduate fields of study, when looking to “address the health-care crisis facing the nation,” and within fields such as law and business. These said communities experience a lower average of healthcare, in part because the doctors who are members of these communities are so low in representation. This alarming disparity creates a level of concern when considering the health of those in underserved communities and communities of color. Therefore, the deficiency of robust standards of ethnic diversity in higher education settings underscores the need for affirmative action.

AFFIRMATIVE ACTION & EDUCATION 

 A racially diverse environment that is fostered by affirmative action leads to greater levels of success for all students. Affirmative action decenters income and access to additional resources as factors determining the composition of a university student body. On the other end of the spectrum, access to private college admissions consulting, SAT tutoring, and attending private school in a wealthy community are all elements that contribute to the success of some students and the relative pitfalls of others. In fact, a study on the effects of going to a public high school in urban areas on applying to and enrolling in the right colleges finds that low-income urban students with the qualifications to attend four-year colleges do not effectively take the steps to apply to and enroll in such institutions. When these characterized “urban” students enroll in college, they are too often enrolling in four-year colleges that fall below the degree of education they are capable of achieving. These students must be encouraged to achieve a level of education that is congruent with their ability. To ignore the notion that minorities have faced discrimination in the classroom and that only specific groups of people have been offered opportunities is to ignore the fundamental right to give students equality in their education and beyond.

 Affirmative action does not only benefit those that identify as part of a certain minority group. The fundamental concept of assembling a diverse collection of people benefits all included. With greater diversity in educational and professional settings comes the inevitable improvement of all involved, authenticating the practice of affirmative action.

Affirmative action ameliorates the struggle for students of color within higher education admissions by centering the process around factors unrelated to income. These policies foster educational opportunities not just for those belonging to minorities but for all students, and stimulates overall societal advancement. Minority groups have been disproportionately affected by the dominance of majority groups throughout all of history. The engendering of equal opportunity and fairness in the classroom should not be seen as a means to take away individual freedom, but as a method to offer this same freedom to all. Affirmative action encourages society to truly represent the demographics of those that are capable, and willing, to contribute to it. These policies are intrinsically designed to uplift all—not foster isolation and separation. 

Joy Botros (BC ‘26) is a Staff Writer in her first semester with CPR, planning to major in Economics or English. She is passionate about constitutional law and literature.