Beijing, 30 Jun (Xinhua) -- The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on 29 June that the admissions policies of Harvard University and the University of North Carolina that take racial factors into account violate the U.S. Constitution. This ruling actually prohibits most American colleges and universities from "taking care" of some minority groups in the admissions process, which is equivalent to overturning a major application of the "affirmative action law" in the United States that has been used for more than half a century.
This is the U.S. Supreme Court photographed on June 29 in Washington, D.C. Photo by Xinhua News Agency reporter Liu Jie
American society is deeply divided on this topic. Even among parents and students of ethnic minority groups, they are divided into two camps because of the different interests affected.
According to the interpretation of some American media, this ruling is a derivative of the current power structure of the Supreme Court with a majority of conservative justices, highlighting the current situation of political polarization in the United States. Republicans were excited, and Democrats, led by President Joseph Biden, slammed the ruling as "contrary to fundamental American values."
Confrontation in court
The vote of the nine justices of the Supreme Court was 6-3. Six conservative justices, including Chief Justice John Roberts, all supported the conclusion that "race-based admissions policies at Harvard and North Carolina universities are unconstitutional," including black Justice Clarence Thomas.
The Associated Press described that when Roberts read the ruling, the atmosphere in the courtroom was heavy, and the justices were mostly expressionless.
Thomas, the longest-serving of the current Supreme Court justices, has consistently opposed affirmative action since taking office in 1991, though his opinion has mostly not been supported in previous rulings.
Thomas and Ketangi Brown Jackson, who was appointed to the Supreme Court by Biden only a year ago, are the only two black justices, and the two have opposite positions on the repeal of the "affirmative action." The former argues that while the bill benefits African-American students, it comes at the cost of discriminating against and harming the Asian American community. "Racism cannot be eliminated with different or greater forms of racism." In his statement, he emphasized.
This is the U.S. Supreme Court photographed on June 29 in Washington, D.C. Photo by Xinhua News Agency reporter Liu Jie
According to Jackson, the ruling is "absolutely tragic for all of us." She believes that the ruling of the day asserts that the law should follow the rule of "regardless of skin color differences", which is "not necessarily the case in life"; Asking college admissions to disregard race is in fact turning a blind eye to the reality of "differentiated treatment of related races."
Jackson was not yet in office when the Supreme Court accepted the Harvard and North Carolina University cases, but the balance of conservative and liberal forces in the Supreme Court had changed at that time, and Republican former President Donald Trump successfully appointed three conservative justices during his term, especially after the death of senior liberal representative Ruth Ginsburg in 2020 and the "fill" of Amy Barrett, the current 6-3 pattern. Against this backdrop, the Supreme Court's conservative-leaning rulings in recent years in cases involving sensitive issues such as abortion and gun control have been criticized by civil rights groups as "historical regression."
Another liberal justice, Hispanic Sonia Sotomayor, called the ruling an overturn "landmark progress made over the past few decades" and criticized Thomas' claims as "baseless." Thomas and Sotomayor, both from grassroots backgrounds, have spoken publicly about their experiences benefiting from affirmative action in school, according to the Associated Press.
Out-of-court confrontation
Biden said at the White House on the same day that he "strongly disagrees" with the Supreme Court ruling, calling on colleges and universities to consider the various "challenges" that applicants face in their growth in the admissions process, including poverty and racial discrimination. "The fact is, as we all know, discrimination still exists in the United States."
On April 24, at the White House in Washington, D.C., US President Joe Biden spoke at an event. Xinhua News Agency (Photo by Aaron)
In response to a reporter's question about whether the current Supreme Court is a "rogue court", Biden replied after a slight pause: "This is not a normal (supreme) court." He explained that the current Supreme Court "has made more [rulings] that undermine fundamental rights and fundamental decisions than previous courts in modern times."
The latest ruling has fueled renewed discussions about whether the Democratic administration will proceed to push for a "Supreme Court expansion." Biden denied this intention in an interview with Microsoft-NBC on the 29th. While the current Supreme Court's value system is not inclusive enough and "can do too much harm, I feel that once the process of expanding the bench is initiated, it may permanently politicize the issue in an unhealthy way."
The rise of the civil rights movement in the United States in the 60s prompted the US Congress to enact affirmative action. The bill provides for the consideration of vulnerable groups such as ethnic minorities and women in university admissions and government recruitment. The bill aims to eliminate racial discrimination and give more preferential policies to vulnerable groups.
On June 19, near the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, D.C., people played as Civil War soldiers to commemorate Emancipation Day. Xinhua News Agency (Photo by Aaron)
The original intention of affirmative action is to ensure that people are not discriminated against or treated unfairly on the basis of ethnicity, religion, gender and other backgrounds. But as time went on, the focus of the implementation of the law gradually shifted to ensuring "ethnic diversity", and some white and Asian students began to complain of "reverse discrimination": even if they had excellent grades, because some elite schools reserved fixed places for African-American and Hispanic students and gave priority admission, the threshold for the former to enter elite schools was raised. Harvard and the University of North Carolina became the first universities to be sued on the Supreme Court over admissions policies.
This is a Harvard University campus photographed in Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA, on July 14, 2020. Xinhua News Agency
CNN quoted legal experts as saying that not all American colleges and universities will be subject to this latest ruling: military colleges and universities can continue to include racial identity as an admissions factor; It also depends on the position of the state in which the university is located, for example, the state government may encourage universities to implement measures not explicitly prohibited in the SPC ruling, such as issuing a declaration advocating "multiculturalism". The Biden administration also said it will release a report in the near future to guide universities on how to promote "diversity" and "fairness" without breaking the law. (Shen Min)