Affirmative Pearls

Confucius is attributed with these words: “To study and not think is a waste. To think and not study is dangerous.” Informed critical thinking seems to be in short supply these days. While I am unqualified to interpret constitutionality or precedents in the law, I do tend to think downstream as well as upstream. Supreme Court decisions last week have massive implications. The “majority” seems to cross a line.

Columbia University president, Lee Bollinger, is a lawyer. He holds the longest tenure as president in the Ivy League (21 years). Previously, he held the presidency role at University of Michigan. His book, A Legacy of Discrimination: The Essential Constitutionality of Affirmative Action (with co-author Geoffrey Stone), warns of dangers of overturning a 2003 Gruttere v. Bollinger Supreme Court decision (upholding affirmative action in promoting diversity in education and ultimately, the general society). Bollinger labels the current ruling “tragic.”

Racial discrimination in the U.S. is problematic on many fronts. Bollinger’s expertise in running major U.S. universities with an effort to promote fairness in the student selection processes has been overlooked by this latest Supreme Court decision. How many of the justices studied his book?  

In an interview with S. Mitra Kalita (4-11-23), Bollinger was worried about how the current members of the Supreme Court would rule on affirmative action. Here is his thinking: “Is it constitutional and consistent with the Civil Rights Act of 1964 for selective universities and colleges to consider race and ethnicity as a factor in accepting students? If the effective answer will be no, if that is the outcome, it will reverse a half-century of efforts by higher education to try to become more diverse, and it will have profound effects on society…

I was a defendant in the Michigan case. That was the first time a majority of the Supreme Court, five to four, ruled in favor of higher education taking race into account as a factor in admissions for educational purposes…the court solidly declared that principle under the 14th Amendment. However, the opponents of affirmative action are dogged…[Professor]Geoff Stone and I wrote this book because we felt that not only is affirmative action constitutional, it has been extremely successful in helping to realize the ideals of Brown v. Board of Education…certainly the greatest decision of the Supreme Court in our entire history. It was a unanimous decision by a court with Republican-and-Democrat-appointed justices.”

In a second Supreme Court decision last week, student loan forgiveness was rebuffed. Notably, the individuals holding the most student loans are Black women. As a point of interest, the 3 justices who believed in affirming “affirmative” education and helping with college debt were all women. Were they better informed on long-term issues?

Former justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg once said: “The right to swing your arm ends just where the other man’s nose begins.” Happy Independence Day!

Pearls of Peace (PoP) Quiz

199. When has a precedent mattered in your life?

200. Does anyone in your family struggle with student loans?