Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar » IBHE responds to US Supreme Court: “This ruling is an attack on people of color”
SUBSCRIBE to Capitol Fax      Advertise Here      About     Exclusive Subscriber Content     Updated Posts    Contact Rich Miller
CapitolFax.com
To subscribe to Capitol Fax, click here.
IBHE responds to US Supreme Court: “This ruling is an attack on people of color”

Thursday, Jun 29, 2023 - Posted by Rich Miller

* The ruling is here. From the Washington Post

The Supreme Court on Thursday held that admissions programs at Harvard and the University of North Carolina that relied in part on racial considerations violate the Constitution’s guarantee of equal protection, a historic ruling that will force a dramatic change in how the nation’s private and public universities select their students.

The votes split along ideological grounds, with Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. writing for the conservative members in the majority, and the liberals dissenting.

“The student must be treated based on his or her experiences as an individual — not on the basis of race,” Roberts wrote. “Many universities have for too long done just the opposite. And in doing so, they have concluded, wrongly, that the touchstone of an individual’s identity is not challenges bested, skills built, or lessons learned but the color of their skin. Our constitutional history does not tolerate that choice.” […]

In dissent on Thursday, Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote that it is is “a disturbing feature of today’s decision that the Court does not even attempt to make the extraordinary showing required” to reverse precedent.

Sotomayor has said her own life is an example of how affirmative action programs can work. In her 69-page dissent, she wrote: “Equal educational opportunity is a prerequisite to achieving racial equality in our Nation.” […]

In his concurring opinion, [Justice Clarence Thomas] directly engaged with Jackson, one of the court’s most liberal members, and the only other Black justice. In Jackson’s view, “almost all of life’s outcomes may be unhesitatingly ascribed to race,” Thomas wrote.

Jackson’s reply to Thomas

JUSTICE THOMAS’s prolonged attack responds to a dissent I did not write in order to assail an admissions program that is not the one UNC has crafted. He does not dispute any historical or present fact about the origins and continued existence of race-based disparity (nor could he), yet is somehow persuaded that these realities have no bearing on a fair assessment of “individual achievement.” JUSTICE THOMAS’s opinion also demonstrates an obsession with race consciousness that far outstrips my or UNC’s holistic understanding that race can be a factor that affects applicants’ unique life experiences. How else can one explain his detection of “an organizing principle based on race,” a claim that our society is “fundamentally racist,” and a desire for Black “victimhood” or racial “silo[s],” in this dissent’s approval of an admissions program that advances all Americans’ shared pursuit of true equality by treating race “on par with” other aspects of identity? JUSTICE THOMAS ignites too many more straw men to list, or fully extinguish, here. The takeaway is that those who demand that no one think about race (a classic pink-elephant paradox) refuse to see, much less solve for, the elephant in the room— the race-linked disparities that continue to impede achievement of our great Nation’s full potential. Worse still, by insisting that obvious truths be ignored, they prevent our problem-solving institutions from directly addressing the real import and impact of “social racism” and “government-imposed racism,” thereby deterring our collective progression toward becoming a society where race no longer matters.

“Pink-elephant paradox” is explained here.

* On to local react. From the Illinois Board of Higher Education…

IBHE Statement on Supreme Court of the United States Decision to End Affirmative Action

Today, the Supreme Court of the United States issued a ruling limiting how universities consider race into their admissions decisions.

This ruling is an attack on people of color, particularly Black people, who face discrimination through multiple facets of American society. Affirmative action already was not a robust solution - it was merely a tool that intended to chip away at an enormous obstacle. It is disheartening to know that there are people intent on stifling racial equity at a time when we should all be working together to break down barriers because that is the right thing to do. A college education is one of the leading predictors for getting out of poverty, and this decision by the Supreme Court will negatively impact people of color seeking economic mobility – something that already seems out of reach – for generations to come.

The Illinois Board of Higher Education (IBHE) and our colleges and universities are committed to continue fighting to close equity gaps for Black, Latino, low-income, working adults and rural students, and we will continue working to make college more affordable. Our work toward an equitable higher education system will continue unabated because diverse and inclusive campuses and student bodies are critical to developing a well-rounded understanding of the world we live in and those with whom we share it. And we will continue to champion equity in the state’s higher education system because it is essential to Illinois’ economic growth.

* Rep. Niemerg…


This post will undoubtedly be updated.

…Adding… Gov. JB Pritzker…

The Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Affirmative Action is a travesty — reversing nearly 45 years of precedent that advances equity throughout our country’s higher education institutions.

The damage caused to Black communities by slavery and Jim Crow Laws, to Hispanics and Native Americans by a legacy of discrimination and oppression has not nearly been reversed. For centuries, students from historically underrepresented and underserved communities were locked out of higher education — preventing upward mobility and stunting economic development for generations to come. Affirmative action admissions practices were a critical step towards creating educational environments that are representative of our diverse nation, while righting the wrongs of our past.

This decision only sets us back.

But here in the Land of Lincoln and Obama, we will continue to uplift our students of color — promoting inclusion and expanding access through record-levels of funding for higher education institutions and our MAP Grant Program, so that every student has the opportunity to earn a degree.

To students of color throughout the Land of Lincoln and the entire United States: you belong in our institutions. And no archaic ruling will ever change that.

* LG Stratton…

We cannot go back in the journey for justice and opportunity for all. Today’s decision by the U.S. Supreme Court to revoke affirmative action in college admissions is a step in the wrong direction, placing thousands of students at risk of discrimination in the pursuit of a bright future.

This is nothing short of an attempt to resegregate higher education. To succeed in our society, a diverse student body must be a part of our institutions of higher learning. Affirmative action has been an academic lifeline for decades that paved an equitable path into higher education for Black and Brown communities across the country. Diverse voices belong in our future, and they deserve support in overcoming barriers propped up by a history of systemic racism.

In Illinois, we believe in a vision of an education system that is fair, just, and uplifts all. From investing in scholarships for educators from underrepresented communities so students can learn from people who look like them and understand their experiences, to increasing state funding for MAP grants so even more can access an affordable education, our administration will continue to create and expand pathways to academic access.

We are proud of our diversity because we know it makes us stronger. Today’s decision does not represent who we are in Illinois, and we are committed to advocating for our students who are seeking a brighter future across our state.

* Speaker Welch…

“Once again, this Supreme Court has cast aside decades of precedent. Once again, this Supreme Court is targeting marginalized populations. And once again, this Supreme Court is telling a generation of young people that they will have fewer opportunities than generations before them.

“Today’s decision is not only out of touch with the majority of people in this country, but it erodes the very foundation of our democracy. Turning a blind eye to systemic inequities will not end racial exclusion, it will perpetuate it. That’s why, once again, Illinois must resolve to move in a fundamentally better direction. As we evaluate the new framework this Court has imposed, we will work to ensure everyone in our state has access to a world-class education and the opportunity to pursue their dreams.”

* Partnership for College Completion…

In the wake of the United States Supreme Court’s decision to strike down affirmative action through cases Students for Fair Admissions v. President and Fellows of Harvard College and Students for Fair Admissions v. University of North Carolina in a 6-2 and 6-3 ruling respectively, the Partnership for College Completion (PCC) remains committed to ensuring racial equity is at the forefront of the work we do in higher education and urges bold action from legislators and institutional stakeholders in the wake of this decision that turns its back on enduring racial inequities within our higher education institutions.

“Simply put, the Supreme Court’s decision to strike down affirmative action is a step back and will hurt students of color, Black students in particular, who have worked hard to gain access to places of higher learning across our country,” Director of Policy and Advocacy Christian Perry said. “The Partnership urges lawmakers, advocates, and institutions to speak out against this decision and not allow it to hinder our efforts to increase racial and socioeconomic diversity through admissions and financial aid processes, as well as on campus once students are enrolled.”

While affirmative action alone was never enough to dismantle all barriers students of color face in accessing higher education, it was a crucial factor for institutions to consider in admissions decisions and was upheld in a number of cases, including as recently as 2016. As college access and degree completion disparities remain significant between white students and students of color, we must continue to push our institutions and leaders to urgently use every available opportunity to correct these wrongs, even now that the affirmative action decision will add one more obstacle to equity.

“We don’t have to let an unjust ruling from the Supreme Court determine how we serve our students – we can still transform our institutions to be more racially equitable and representative of the population of our state and nation. From admissions to degree completion, let’s use this moment to work with state policymakers to give institutions the tools they need to create better policies to ensure all of our students can not only access higher education but also obtain their degrees,” Perry said.

In the wake of this decision to strike down decades of precedent, institutions, and lawmakers will need to be thoughtful in order to maintain and increase racial diversity on our college campuses.

* DPI…

Democratic Party of Illinois Chair Lisa Hernandez released the following statement on the U.S. Supreme Court ruling to end affirmative action in college admissions:

“Today, the U.S. Supreme Court sent down a devastating ruling that ends affirmative action in higher education. Members of marginalized groups have been historically denied access to institutions of higher education, and today’s decision will further harm Black and brown students seeking opportunities that have long been afforded to those with power and privilege. Affirmative action is a key protection in working to level the playing field for those who have been sidelined for far too long. This decision undermines decades of progress reducing inequality in education. We won’t let far-right extremists on the Supreme Court determine our futures as they repeatedly roll back rights and protections, especially for the most vulnerable among us. Student bodies that reflect the diversity of our society make educational institutions more fulfilling and more enriching. We can’t afford to go backward; we must continue our fight to build a more just, equitable, and inclusive future for all,” said DPI Chair Lisa Hernandez.

* Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson…

Today’s decision by the U.S. Supreme Court that will effectively end affirmative action is devastating for decades of progress toward creating equitable and inclusive education opportunities for students of color. Affirmative action was a means by which generations of children were allowed access to institutions, access to ideas, and access to cultures that a wicked system of discrimination had long excluded them from. This decision will only further divide communities and strain existing inequities in higher education, but through those inequities will come opportunities for organizing and excellence in the face of struggle.

* US Sen. Durbin…

“I’m disappointed in the Supreme Court’s ruling effectively barring the use of race as a factor in college admissions. The Court’s conservative majority just upended nearly 50 years of established precedent in a move that undermines the progress our country has made advancing racial justice.

“America’s ever-evolving commitment to the fundamental right to live free from discrimination requires us to acknowledge historical wrongs. Tearing down support for historically marginalized populations makes our country less equal, not more.

“The impact of this decision will be felt immediately, as universities struggle to adapt to a troubling new reality that ignores the compelling and valuable interest of diversity in a student body — and students of color will face admissions cycles that devalue their lived experience in America.”

* Sen. Duckworth…

For decades, affirmative action helped chip away at systemic barriers and discrimination against students of color in our education system’s college admissions process. Let’s be clear: colorblindness has never been a true friend of fairness—it ignores our history and perpetuates discrimination. In ending affirmative action, today’s misguided ruling from the far-right, ultra-conservative Supreme Court is a devastating blow to progress, equity and equality for all. In every facet of our society, diversity always makes us stronger—and I’ll continue to do everything I can to help expand opportunities and make sure every American has a fair shot at accessing higher education.

* Chuy…

Congressman Jesús “Chuy” García (IL-04) issued the following statement on the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn affirmative action.

“Today, the Supreme Court issued another ruling that takes away our rights and sets us back decades. To quote Justice Brown Jackson’s dissent, ‘deeming race irrelevant in law does not make it so in life.’ Overturning affirmative action and returning to a mythical ‘colorblind’ admissions policy means doubling down on a legacy of segregation and exclusion. And to be clear, there is nothing colorblind about ending affirmative action while legacy admissions continue.

“This decision rips away education access from communities already facing disinvestment and inequitable paths to opportunity. It also undermines a diverse workforce, our economy, and our future. This is a devastating ruling from a cruel Supreme Court.”

* SEIU Local 1 President Genie Kastrup…

The highest court in the land – one that is supposed to promote justice and equality for all – just ended one of the most effective social justice policies this country has seen. Simply put: SCOTUS’s decision only benefits the wealthy, the well-connected, and frankly, white folks – all at the expense of people of color.

Affirmative action benefits everyone. It levels the playing field for marginalized groups and ensures every student is exposed to multi-ethnic and multi-cultural environments that reflect the real world we live in. It’s hard enough for working families to pursue college and until we can guarantee that every young person regardless of their skin color, zip code, or income can access high-quality education, affirmative action must remain.

Local 1 remains committed to empowering communities of color and will work to dismantle institutions that perpetuate racism – from the workplace to the education system. We need to urgently meet this moment and demand better for our young people – the future depends on it.

* Latino Policy Forum…

Today, in two decisions (SSFA v. UNC and SSFA v. Harvard), the United States Supreme Court effectively dismantled affirmative action in college and university admissions decisions. The Latino Policy Forum decries these decisions.

These decisions have the potential to impact college access for Latino students dramatically, something we can ill afford in a knowledge-based economy in which Latinos have the lowest levels of college completion among racial and ethnic groups.

Geographic considerations for admission and legacy admissions appear legally intact and available to those who can access them. Why racial and ethnic considerations are precluded from playing such a role is a significant and aggravating question for those concerned with equity in education.

The Court’s action has the immediate impact of demolishing an avenue of ensuring that college students reflect the demographic mosaic of the United States. This demolition creates yet another structural impediment standing in the way of individuals from historically marginalized groups gaining access to public and private colleges and universities, but especially disheartening is what is likely to happen to Latinos in the game of college admissions.

With this action by the Supreme Court, Latinos, one of the country’s youngest and fastest growing demographics, with recent growth in college attendance but still, relatively low rates of college admission and completion, are likely to see their admission numbers decrease.

While colleges and universities cannot erase the impact of the Court’s decisions, one way to ensure some enhanced equity in admissions for Latinos and other marginalized groups is for colleges and universities to significantly expand their commitment and resources to and outreach efforts in, recruiting first-generation college students, low-income students, immigrants, and students whose primary language is not English.

These decisions are profoundly regrettable, and it is now incumbent on colleges and universities to structure admissions procedures in such a way as to legally ensure that student bodies reflect the racial and ethnic diversity of the nation.

* IFT…

linois Federation of Teachers (IFT) President Dan Montgomery issued the following statement after today’s devasting ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court on affirmative action in college admissions.

“As an educator and union leader, I am devastated that countless Black, Brown, Indigenous, and marginalized students will lose opportunities to pursue higher education at top universities. This harmful ruling will have lasting implications for students looking to attend institutions that seek to promote diversity and equity in their student bodies and will have detrimental effects far beyond the few universities at issue in today’s rulings.

“We cannot continue to sweep racism under the rug and pretend that our institutions are color blind. Sadly, today justices stripped thousands of students of their futures by making it acceptable for institutions to operate under exclusionary policies. Their decision seriously threatens democracy and equality and harkens back to our shameful Jim Crow past.

“As this court did with labor rights in Janus, with voting rights in Holder, and with reproductive rights in Dobbs, these affirmative action decisions cavalierly discard decades of established law. Americans are in the clutches of a rogue radical right-wing court detached from mainstream American legal thought and far out of touch with the beliefs of most Americans.

“Today’s decision makes it very clear why elections matter. Among other efforts, we will continue to work with our governor and legislature to revamp higher education funding so the neediest students have college access, and no students or families must endure crippling debt simply to get a college education.”

* ISAC…

As the state’s college access and financial aid agency, the Illinois Student Assistance Commission (ISAC) works every day with students and families of color, first generation students, rural students, and low-income students. Many of these students face significant obstacles to higher education—obstacles that can stem from lack of college-going experience, financial pressures, and racial discrimination. None of these obstacles exist in a vacuum. They can create a cycle that disadvantages students with talent and promise who must often work much harder just to gain access to a college education. A diverse community in higher education benefits all of us.

Our colleagues at the state’s colleges and universities have their work cut out for them as they react to today’s ruling. We know that regardless of this decision, they will work to ensure access and to promote equity and opportunity for Illinois students from all backgrounds, all ZIP codes, and, indeed, students of all racial and ethnic backgrounds. For over six decades, ISAC’s mission has focused on making education beyond high school accessible and affordable for all students, and we will not waver in our commitment. ISAC will continue to support students and families statewide, through the Monetary Award Program for students with financial need, outreach programming designed to support all students, including those who would be the first in their families to get a college degree, and other free resources to help ensure that every student gets the opportunities they deserve.

       

57 Comments
  1. - Jerry - Thursday, Jun 29, 23 @ 10:59 am:

    Hey Adam: Thats NOT what the Supreme Court did.


  2. - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Jun 29, 23 @ 11:00 am:

    The jubilance of Niemerg reminds of the angst during the 1960s to segregate schools like Ole Miss and Alabama.

    It’s as though “standing in the schoolhouse door” in Tuscaloosa has found new fans.


  3. - halving_fun - Thursday, Jun 29, 23 @ 11:02 am:

    Guess what schools are exempted
    Military academies.

    Why is that 🤔?


  4. - Blake - Thursday, Jun 29, 23 @ 11:04 am:

    Perhaps the IBHE could treat class as the primary disparity to worry about & let that help with other disparities.


  5. - Jerry - Thursday, Jun 29, 23 @ 11:04 am:

    Thank you Governor Pritzker for your comment.


  6. - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Jun 29, 23 @ 11:05 am:

    So…

    Republicans want to require women to carry pregnancies to term, no matter a reason

    Republicans want to keep firearms in the hands of all, no matter the historic dangers or the victims that are lost.

    Now, Republicans want to ensure racial blindness means less opportunities for those not white.

    Regression.


  7. - Sir Reel - Thursday, Jun 29, 23 @ 11:08 am:

    I remember when Republicans decried how Democrat-nominated justices would ignore juducial precedent. How they said Democratic nominees wanted to use the corts to make law. So much for the old days.


  8. - Sir Reel - Thursday, Jun 29, 23 @ 11:09 am:

    Courts not corts.


  9. - Suburban Mom - Thursday, Jun 29, 23 @ 11:17 am:

    Republicans are going to be pretty surprised when the primary beneficiary of this is not white men.


  10. - Jocko - Thursday, Jun 29, 23 @ 11:17 am:

    Clarence Thomas is the quintessential republican who gets a hand up, then removes the ladder for others to use.

    I’m curious when he (and Alito) will get around to filling out their financial disclosure forms.


  11. - Trap - Thursday, Jun 29, 23 @ 11:18 am:

    As long as it is leftist endorsed racism, it’s fine. How about…no racism of any kind ?


  12. - Anyone Remember - Thursday, Jun 29, 23 @ 11:19 am:

    A simple, but imprecise, work around. Applicant’s socio-economic status (not just income, there have been cases of children being “legally adopted” by poorer relatives for financial aid purposes). How about percentage of students at the applicant’s high school who get free meals?


  13. - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Jun 29, 23 @ 11:19 am:

    ===As long as it is leftist endorsed racism, it’s fine. How about…no racism of any kind ?===

    Explain the exception for the military academies.

    Be careful, it’s a trap


  14. - Amalia - Thursday, Jun 29, 23 @ 11:25 am:

    Suburban Mom is on it. folks with Asian heritage are thrilled at this. I’m certainly sensitive to racism. I also think that class is a huge barrier and should receive more emphasis. Poor white folks in many parts of the country have no real chance with bad internet service, healthcare and schools. You can joke that it is of the making of white elected officials but unless you’ve been there, have family there, you don’t understand. one of the reasons there is so much enlistment in the military is that it is often the only way out.


  15. - Google Is Your Friend - Thursday, Jun 29, 23 @ 11:28 am:

    - Anyone Remember - Thursday, Jun 29, 23 @ 11:19 am:

    California banned affirmative action in higher education in the 1990s, but socioeconomic policies have predictably failed because indirectly addressing a problem is never as holistic or complete a solution as directly addressing the problem.

    In a 2020 study, Bleemer found that the ban caused Black and Latino students who might otherwise have gotten into UCLA and UC Berkeley to cascade down into less competitive campuses; others chose not to apply for UC admission altogether. Such UC applicants ended up earning fewer undergraduate and graduate degrees and, for Latinos, lower wages. By the mid-2010s, the effects of Proposition 209 had reduced the number of early-career Black and Latino Californians earning more than $100,000 by about 3%, or as many as 1,000 earners, according to the study.

    “This was a sort of a permanent shock to young Black and Hispanic workers,” Bleemer said. “And it didn’t lead to a symmetric boost for white and Asian students who gained access to these universities.”

    https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2022-10-31/california-banned-affirmative-action-uc-struggles-for-diversity


  16. - Bull Durham - Thursday, Jun 29, 23 @ 11:33 am:

    I will posit that adjusting for socioeconomic status by the universities as part of admissions decisions will be more exact, better tailored, legally compliant and substantially reduce the weeping and wailing taking place today.


  17. - Jerry - Thursday, Jun 29, 23 @ 11:34 am:

    In Illinois, what is “rightist” endorsed racism?


  18. - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Jun 29, 23 @ 11:35 am:

    ===will be more exact===

    Explain legacy admissions and finite seats / admissions

    Take your time.


  19. - Steve - Thursday, Jun 29, 23 @ 11:37 am:

    Today’s big decision was about Section 1 of the 14th Amendment. I assume this majority decision will be used as legal precedent for challenging special programs based on certain classifications in other industries. It’s time to get rid of legacy admissions (because those are de facto racial quotas ).


  20. - Steve - Thursday, Jun 29, 23 @ 11:39 am:

    -Explain legacy admissions-

    There’s no defense for them. Zero . Especially since 99.99% of higher educational institutions get money from the federal government.


  21. - Anyone Remember - Thursday, Jun 29, 23 @ 11:40 am:

    Google Is Your Friend

    When Texas / Bush 43 banned race, it instituted a policy that certain top percentage (5% ?) of graduates from each high school were guaranteed a spot in the University of Texas system. Regardless of grades or test scores.

    For the record, I think SCOTUS was wrong. But something has to be done in the interim.

    And … having not read the opinion … does the opinion address “legacies” ??


  22. - 47th Ward - Thursday, Jun 29, 23 @ 11:40 am:

    ===(not just income, there have been cases of children being “legally adopted” by poorer relatives for financial aid purposes)===

    Link?


  23. - Michelle Flaherty - Thursday, Jun 29, 23 @ 11:41 am:

    As a white man, I cannot fathom the suffering and oppression Rep. Niemerg suffered at Lake Land and EIU. /s


  24. - Rich Miller - Thursday, Jun 29, 23 @ 11:45 am:

    ===having not read the opinion … does the opinion address===

    Control/F


  25. - Jibba - Thursday, Jun 29, 23 @ 12:05 pm:

    For 47th: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/wealthy-parents-giving-guardianship-their-kids-qualify-financial-aid-report-n1036241

    I wasn’t sure that anything would make me support reparations, but including college admissions might make me change my mind.


  26. - Steve - Thursday, Jun 29, 23 @ 12:07 pm:

    -Republicans are going to be pretty surprised when the primary beneficiary of this is not white men.-

    Every year since 1982, a majority of women have gotten 4 year degrees. The majority is getting bigger because women as a group as better students. Men just aren’t as good of students in modern day America.


  27. - Lakefront - Thursday, Jun 29, 23 @ 12:07 pm:

    == Now, Republicans want to ensure racial blindness means less opportunities for those not white ==

    As has been rightly pointed out in the comments, the primary beneficiary of this decision will not be white individuals. Also, many respected institutions have already made continued commitments to diversity following this ruling. They will simply have to use other means (non race-based) to achieve those targets.


  28. - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Jun 29, 23 @ 12:13 pm:

    ===As has been rightly pointed out in the comments, the primary beneficiary of this decision will not be white individuals.===

    It’s adorable that one reads the thoughts to Republicans running on this decision as a win is truthful to the thought.

    The goal of the GOP is to punish someone while seemingly pretend at times it’s going to benefit “whites”

    I wrote the following

    ===Now, Republicans want to ensure racial blindness means less opportunities for those not white===

    I don’t think I wrote, if I read the words, that it benefits… whites.

    The pain to others, any others GOPers want hurt, is a feature.

    Hope that clears it all up, words and all


  29. - Rich Miller - Thursday, Jun 29, 23 @ 12:20 pm:

    ===having not read the opinion … does the opinion address===


  30. - Steve - Thursday, Jun 29, 23 @ 12:21 pm:

    -The pain to others, any others GOPers want hurt, is a feature.-

    The Harvard case had to do with Asian-Americans having to have higher SAT scores and being given “bad personality” ratings unlike other groups.


  31. - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Jun 29, 23 @ 12:28 pm:

    ===The Harvard case had to do with===

    You are confusing the ruling to the politics to the ruling.

    You think Niemerg is pandering to Asian Americans in his district… or…

    C’mon.


  32. - City Zen - Thursday, Jun 29, 23 @ 12:29 pm:

    A well-deserved win for the Asian American community.

    While the intent of AA was not to discriminate against, say, the Japanese-American student descended from those interned during WWII, that’s what it evolved into. Time to think of better ways to serve underserved and minority students.


  33. - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Jun 29, 23 @ 12:40 pm:

    When you think that legacy considerations are not touched and the military academies are exempt…

    … the list of losers isn’t as telling as the politics to the “losers” for folks like Niemerg to cheer.

    Huh


  34. - Jerry - Thursday, Jun 29, 23 @ 1:10 pm:

    The ruling left the these forms of Affirmative Action still intact for the sailing, fencing and squash teams on campus.


  35. - Google Is Your Friend - Thursday, Jun 29, 23 @ 1:27 pm:

    - Anyone Remember - Thursday, Jun 29, 23 @ 11:40 am:

    And a couple of white women still sued over not getting in and got to SCOTUS twice (Fisher I and Fisher II). That gives away the game. White people don’t want a society free of racial bias or racial inequality, they want a society where they can pretend their success and access is based on merit, when it really isn’t. And when merit doesn’t get them what they want, then merit all of a sudden doesn’t matter to them.


  36. - froganon - Thursday, Jun 29, 23 @ 1:48 pm:

    Let’s provide enough funding for education and for higher education so that every person who wants to get a degree can get one. People need vocational and academic avenues to find their place in our economy. They need to be able to move between jobs and continuing education with relative ease.
    We also need a SCOTUS that stops reversing laws that make America function.


  37. - Sue - Thursday, Jun 29, 23 @ 2:41 pm:

    Anyone being intellectually honest is aware that the Backke decision was never intended to be permanent. Sandra Day who became beloved by the left for her abortion views wrote several opinions suggesting the Country would one day reach a place where discriminating on behalf of Blacks for school admissions would run its course. How can anyone who believes in equality of opportunity believe it’s fair to prefer blacks over Asians for school admission purposes. If we want to move forward as a country we need to stop dividing groups solely for political gain


  38. - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Jun 29, 23 @ 2:42 pm:

    ===How can anyone who believes in equality of opportunity believe it’s fair to prefer blacks over Asians for school admission purposes.===

    Thank you - Sue -

    Showing who you are, now at a whole different level.

    Wow. You typed that.


  39. - Jibba - Thursday, Jun 29, 23 @ 2:46 pm:

    Anyone who is being intellectually honest is aware that we have not yet come to the promised land of a race-neutral country, even if we all hope we will get there someday. Justice O’Connor was a little naive about how long it would take.

    ===How about…no racism of any kind===

    Sounds good to me, but it doesn’t start at the college door. It starts in the womb. Eliminate the effects of discrimination and poverty in medicine, nutrition, home environment, preschool, childhood education, and employment, and then we can talk about ending affirmative programs to level the playing field.


  40. - Sue - Thursday, Jun 29, 23 @ 2:47 pm:

    OW- I can do without your personal insults though I guess your criticism is applicable to you as well if you believe it’s ok to discriminate against one minority to advance another


  41. - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Jun 29, 23 @ 2:52 pm:

    ===I can do without your personal insults===

    Mine?

    ======How can anyone who believes in equality of opportunity believe it’s fair to prefer blacks over Asians for school admission purposes.===

    You typed this because this?

    ===the Country would one day reach a place where discriminating on behalf of Blacks for school admissions would run its course.===

    I mean… it’s like you’ve had it with…

    You showing who you are is priceless now. Thank you.

    Oh, it’s not “one” minority, you seem to be choosing one to say you’ve had enough.

    Huh.


  42. - Sue - Thursday, Jun 29, 23 @ 2:56 pm:

    That statement is from a Sandra Day opinion questioning how long affirmative action in higher Ed admissions would be necessary- she didn’t believe it was forever and my guess is she would have been part of the 6 and not the 3 if she was still on the Court


  43. - Rich Miller - Thursday, Jun 29, 23 @ 2:58 pm:

    ===blacks over Asians===

    Maybe read Sen. Duckworth’s statement?


  44. - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Jun 29, 23 @ 3:00 pm:

    Oh - Sue -… I’d stop.

    ===and my guess is she would have been part of the 6===

    You have no idea how she’d rule, but you’re done with preferential treatment, as you say, and ===fair to prefer blacks over Asians for school admission purposes===

    Whew. Wow.

    You’ve said quite enough. Appreciate it.


  45. - 47th Ward - Thursday, Jun 29, 23 @ 3:06 pm:

    Thanks for the link Jibba.

    From the link for those who didn’t read it:

    “ProPublica identified a college consulting firm run by Lora Georgieve called Destination College which has ties to many of the families suspected of exploiting this loophole. The group, which did not reply to ProPublica’s request for comment, offers “strategies to lower tuition expenses.”

    Maybe ISAC can get the Attorney General to look into this. Seems like a classic case of fraud to me, with the added bonus of shady attorneys lying to judges. Judges usually hate that.

    Scamming the college admissions process has become a cottage industry. And lucrative too. But fraud is still fraud, so I hope this gets a closer look.


  46. - Dotnonymous x - Thursday, Jun 29, 23 @ 3:08 pm:

    Anyone who claims to be colorblind in America is full of mashed up crayons.

    Americans are among the most racially conscious people on Earth…as we hide… from the original sin of human bondage in the form of institutionalized Slavery.


  47. - Demoralized - Thursday, Jun 29, 23 @ 3:20 pm:

    ==of Blacks==

    Tell us you’re a racist without telling us you’re a racist.


  48. - Google Is Your Friend - Thursday, Jun 29, 23 @ 3:47 pm:

    Also, for everyone suggesting using geographic or socioeconomic data instead, the right-wing has already announced that this is their next target (and in fact, they are already litigating).

    https://www.nytimes.com/live/2023/06/29/us/affirmative-action-supreme-court#the-next-big-worry-for-colleges-more-lawsuits


  49. - OneMan - Thursday, Jun 29, 23 @ 3:59 pm:

    I think this isn’t going to help Rep Niemberg’s constituents get their kids into U of I’s Engineering program as much as he thinks it will.

    Disagree with the ruling, but here we are.

    The Texas 5% model would not be bad for U of I in-state residents. Besides U of I, are any of our state schools really that selective? It seems like some variation of that would also work for the rest of the state school.

    As for the highly selective schools, I had a co-worker’s daughter go through this recently and that process is so screwed up….

    Set an overall lower admission bar and then it’s a lottery.

    But that isn’t going to happen. Many of those schools have a strong vested interest in making being a donor, a legacy, and the rest of that stuff worth the investment.

    While I am dreaming, how about we set quotas on judges and others in the federal government who didn’t go to an Ivy or the like.

    The Supreme Court and the federal judiciary might be better off with more Kent Law graduates. The federal government might benefit from more policy makers who went to a school with a state and a direction in its name (or just a state).


  50. - Jocko - Thursday, Jun 29, 23 @ 4:39 pm:

    ==Sandra Day opinion questioning how long affirmative action in higher Ed admissions would be necessary==

    Because, when it comes to race, I look to (at the time) a 73-year-old white lady from Texas


  51. - CapnCrunch - Thursday, Jun 29, 23 @ 4:49 pm:

    “Anyone who claims to be colorblind in America is full of mashed up crayons…”

    Last October the University of Southern California Center for Economic and Social Research surveyed a nationally representative sample of 3,751 Americans as part of their Understanding America Study (UAS). This study has tracked Americans’ economic and social conditions for nearly a decade. They wanted to know what Americans thought about teaching controversial topics related to race, and other areas to K-12 students. Among the findings were that 95% of Republicans and 93% of Democrats agreed that society should strive for colorblind tolerance. There was also majority support from both parties, -83% Republicans, 55% Democrats, for the idea that the U.S. is fundamentally meritocratic.


  52. - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Jun 29, 23 @ 4:54 pm:

    That’s good stuff - OneMan -

    Appreciate your thoughts.

    ===The Supreme Court and the federal judiciary might be better off with more Kent Law graduates. The federal government might benefit from more policy makers who went to a school with a state and a direction in its name (or just a state).===

    More and more, there’s a seemingly true disconnect to the judiciary and the people when rulings are designed (and also narrowed) to bring backwards case law to times of more privileged, and one can read that word “privileged” in a few contexts…


  53. - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Jun 29, 23 @ 4:56 pm:

    ===There was also majority support from both parties, -83% Republicans, 55% Democrats, for the idea that the U.S. is fundamentally meritocrat===

    Then you’d think more folks would be angered by the idea of legacy admissions. It’s not an accident that this ruling steers clear of that


  54. - City Zen - Thursday, Jun 29, 23 @ 5:11 pm:

    ==Then you’d think more folks would be angered by the idea of legacy admissions.==

    If you’re angered by the idea of legacy admissions, bring a case about legacy admissions to the court. The court only hears the cases brought before it.

    Or you can lobby your local congressperson to pass legislation banning the practice. Seems like it would pass easily.


  55. - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Jun 29, 23 @ 5:24 pm:

    Oh - City Zen -, your zeal for your own wants, sophomoric as some are, are truly a delight.

    The Court decided not to go after legacy admissions, and they decided the military academies are exempt from the ruling.

    Do you support legacy admissions, since you wanna educate me, it’s a yes or a no, thanks.


  56. - filmmaker prof - Thursday, Jun 29, 23 @ 6:03 pm:

    How about this: the racial makeup of the football and basketball teams has to be consistent with the racial makeup of the overall student body? Then watch how quickly Republicans change their tune.


  57. - Retired School Board Member - Friday, Jun 30, 23 @ 8:32 am:

    On the subject of colorblindness- it is an insult to any and every person of color to suggest that it is preferable to not see color. Such a position implies that to see color would enable a negative prejudice. When people plant their flag on being colorblind, they are revealing more about themselves than they realize. When we, as a society still claim that we don’t see color, we are saying that seeing color is bad. Why? Because way too many people still associate color with negatives. Color should not be muted, rendered invisible or erased. Color should be celebrated! And every time someone suggests that colorblindness is the goal, it demonstrates just how much further we have to go.

    It also demonstrates that June 29, 2023 was not the day that Affirmative Action policies were no longer necessary.


Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.


* Isabel’s afternoon roundup
* Showcasing the Retailers Who Make Illinois Work
* Caption contest!
* Rep. Croke changes selective enrollment closure moratorium bill to ban all Chicago public school closures until elected board is seated
* State tax credit for affordable housing development receives big push from labor, business, advocates
* Listen To Servers – Vote No On House Bill 5345
* Today's must-read CTA stories, especially if you're Gov. Pritzker (Updated)
* Illinois residents can now easily access electronic notary services
* It’s just a bill
* Open thread
* Isabel’s morning briefing
* SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Supplement to today’s edition
* SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Today's edition of Capitol Fax (use all CAPS in password)
* Live coverage
* Yesterday's stories

Support CapitolFax.com
Visit our advertisers...

...............

...............

...............

...............


Loading


Main Menu
Home
Illinois
YouTube
Pundit rankings
Obama
Subscriber Content
Durbin
Burris
Blagojevich Trial
Advertising
Updated Posts
Polls

Archives
April 2024
March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
December 2023
November 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004

Blog*Spot Archives
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005

Syndication

RSS Feed 2.0
Comments RSS 2.0




Hosted by MCS SUBSCRIBE to Capitol Fax Advertise Here Mobile Version Contact Rich Miller