Civil Rights and Discrimination Commons^™

Rebuilding The Foundation: A Discussion On Affirmative Action And Its Role In Improving Our Education System, Jacinda Thermidor

Journal of Civil Rights and Economic Development

(Excerpt)

For a long time, affirmative action policies have been fixated on race and gender. Justifiably so, since both define historically marginalized groups that still need explicit federal protections to ensure that people in these groups move through economic and educational spaces effectively and safely. Legislators have attempted to meet this need for protection by explicitly naming race and gender as protected classes in anti-discrimination laws. However, legislators have overlooked a factor that not only is the underlying issue behind inequities in education but can help achieve the goals that Supreme Court Justices and legislators had in mind—this factor is …

The Paradox Of Equal Protection: Anti-Subordination Rhetoric In Service Of Anti-Classification Ends, Aanya Ghosh

Bates College Undergraduate Law Review

This article examines the evolution of Equal Protection jurisprudence through the competing lenses of anti-classification and anti-subordination. Anti-classification holds that the Constitution prohibits governmental use of racial categories regardless of purpose; anti-subordination holds that the Equal Protection Clause targets the perpetuation of racial hierarchy rather than the mere use of racial categories. Beginning with the foundational ambiguity of Brown v. Board of Education (1954) and tracing the doctrinal trajectory through Regents of the University of California v. Bakke (1978), Grutter v. Bollinger (2003), Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. 1 (2007), and Students for Fair Admissions …

1981, Carliss N. Chatman

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

42 U.S.C. § 1981 should have solved a pervasive problem in American capitalism—when white economic interests do not converge with the contract rights of Black people, they are excluded from the market in a way that causes systemic harm. This Article proposes that the failure to enforce 1981 in the past may render it more harmful than beneficial in the present climate of retrenchment. The realities of racism combine with the lack of economic interest convergence to make combatting contract inequality on a contract-by-contract basis legally precarious, nearly impossible to properly evaluate, and difficult to economically incentivize. This is in …

Balancing The Scales Between The Evolution Of Affirmative Action Policies And The Equal Protection Clause, Jesicca Patel

Journal of Race, Gender, and Ethnicity

This article argues that the Supreme Court’s ruling ending affirmative action was correct. Affirmative action does not solve the underlying issues of racial inequality and systemic oppression. Instead, affirmative action undermines the success of minorities and inflames racial tensions. This article is divided into Five Parts. The first part examines U.S. Supreme Court precedent addressing the Court’s decisions in upholding affirmative action policies in educational settings before Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College. The second part discusses Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College and why the Supreme Court …

Reversing Progress: The Political And Legal Ramifications Of The 2025 Dei Policy Rollback, Bridgette Baldwin

Faculty Scholarship

The year 2025 will mark a significant turning point in the landscape of American civil rights policy, as federal executive orders the Trump administration initiated seek to dismantle longstanding diversity, equity, and inclusion ("DEI") initiatives. Rooted in a historical context of civil rights progress, these orders aim to curtail affirmative action programs, eliminate DEI mandates within federal agencies and contractors, and challenge the legal foundations of inclusive policies across the country. This Article explores the evolving landscape of civil rights and DEI in the United States, examining its historical roots, recent legal and political developments, and ongoing challenges. From landmark …

Seeking Safety And Losing The Self: Affirmative Action Bans And The Whitening Of Mexican American Identity, Bella Bennett

Indiana Journal of Law and Social Equality

No abstract provided.

The Fearless Decision And The Future Of Race-Conscious Charities, Chenglin Liu

Faculty Articles

Historically, courts tended to differentiate between invidious discrimination against racial minorities and benign discrimination against whites in the context of affirmative action movements. With the social movements galvanized by the conservatives and the change of composition of the Supreme Courts and lower courts, the feasibility of race-conscious measures aimed at helping minorities is substantially reduced. The conservatives' win in Fearless, coupled with the Trump Administration's attacks on DEI, have produced a self-censoring effect on charitable organizations. Because of these threats, race-conscious charities will have to modify their practices to become more "inclusive" or face legal challenges from conservatives.

Forward Progress: The Rooney Rule And Its Post-Sffa Relevance, N. Jeremi Duru

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

In 2003, the National Football League (NFL), which had long struggled with racial inequity both on and off the field, implemented a policy known as the Rooney Rule, requiring that any league club searching for a head coach interview at least one person of color before making a hire. In the over two decades since, employers of all sorts seeking to increase opportunities for people of color and women have adopted a form of the Rule. Indeed, it has gained traction from coast to coast. Hundreds of American employers utilize the Rooney Rule or a policy derived therefrom. In the …

The Right To Inequality: Conservative Politics And Precedent Collide, Jonathan Feingold

Faculty Scholarship

The “end of affirmative action” is the beginning of this story. In Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard (SFFA), the Supreme Court struck a near fatal blow to race-consciousness. Many institutions have since pivoted to “race neutral alternatives.” This is a natural turn. But one that faces immediate headwinds.

The same entities that demanded Harvard pursue racial diversity through colorblind means have sued public high schools for doing just that. These litigants assert a “right to inequality”—a theory that would pit the equal protection clause against equality itself. Even if normatively jarring, a right to inequality might seem a …

The Rise And Fall Of The Consideration Of Race And Ethnicity In The Admissions Process: The Long-Term Negative Consequences Of The Fall, Kevin Brown

Indiana Law Journal

Chief Justice Roberts wrote the majority opinion for the Supreme Court that struck down the affirmative action policies of Harvard College and the University of North Carolina. While Justices Thomas, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh each wrote separate concurring opinions, they also joined Chief Justice Roberts’s opinion along with Justices Alito and Barrett. Thus, unlike the Court’s prior significant decisions that narrowly upheld affirmative action by one vote, this decision’s six-Justice majority allowed Chief Justice Roberts to write an opinion that more definitively rejected affirmative action than the Court’s tentative and cautious opinions upholding it. Despite what many may think about the …

Overturning Sffa V. Harvard, David Hinojosa, Chavis Jones

The Scholar: St. Mary's Law Review on Race and Social Justice

One of the first lessons law students learn is the importance of stare decisis. It not only serves as a tool to learn how to apply settled law to argument and persuasive writing, but foundationally stare decisis helps promote the public’s trust, confidence, and faith in the judicial system. Thus, when the Supreme Court issued its 6-3 opinion in 2023 in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard/University of North Carolina (“Harvard”), most onlookers viewed the decision as being the final nail in the coffin for affirmative action in higher education admissions. However, we—the authors—are among the minority.

In …

From College Campus To Corner Office: The Impact Of Sffa V. Harvard On Voluntary Affirmative Action Programs, Ellen Whitehair

University of Cincinnati Law Review

No abstract provided.

(How) Can Litigation Advance Multiracial Democracy?, Olatunde C.A. Johnson

Faculty Scholarship

Can rights litigation meaningfully advance social change in this moment? Many progressive or social justice legal scholars, lawyers, and advocates would argue “no.” Constitutional decisions issued by the U.S. Supreme Court thwart the aims of progressive social movements. Further, contemporary social movements often decenter courts as a primary domain of social change. In addition, a new wave of legal commentary urges progressives to de-emphasize courts and constitutionalism, not simply tactically but as a matter of democratic survival.

This Essay considers the continuing role of rights litigation, using the litigation over race-conscious affirmative action as an illustration. Courts are a key …

The Domino Effect: Discussing The Future Implications Of Students For Fair Admissions, Inc. V. Harvard, Marissa C. Meredith

Duquesne Law Review

Since 1978, the United States Supreme Court has grappled with creating fair policies and just parameters to enable institutions of higher education to incorporate race -conscious admission policies to diversify students' educational experience.¹ The Court began this vital discussion with its landmark ruling in Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, where it determined not just that diversity in education was a compelling state interest that could survive strict scrutiny,² but also that it could not be achieved through the use of a quota system or a specialized track.3 The Court continued shaping the parameters of …

The Evolution Of Race-Based Admissions In American Higher Education, Chenglin Liu

Faculty Articles

This Article examines the Supreme Court’s evolving position on race-based admissions policies over the past 127 years. Between Plessy and Brown, universities used race-based policies to exclude black applicants from white universities. Brown shifted admissions policies from blocking black students to accepting them. As affirmative action gained momentum, universities escalated from merely accepting minority candidates to proactive recruitment by using quotas and lowering their admissions standards. The Court in Bakke set the ground rules for race-based admissions during that period. In 2003, Grutter upheld the university’s pursuit for a “critical mass” of minority students in its entering class. Two …

Affirmative Action's Asian American Problem, Huyen Pham, Joseph Thai

Faculty Articles

Asian American opponents of affirmative action have received both credit and blame for their pivotal role in toppling racial preferences in university admissions in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard (SFFA). Allied conservatives highlighted evidence of discrimination against Asian American applicants as a compelling reason to dismantle affirmative action; liberals either denied this discrimination existed or tolerated it as an acceptable cost of helping other minority applicants. But largely unacknowledged is the precipitating history of the Supreme Court’s marginalization of Asian American applicants and its decades of tacit approval of their exclusion from affirmative action programs. This unwritten history is …

Brown Now: The Surprising Possibility Of Progressive Reform, Louis Michael Seidman

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

For four decades, the Supreme Court has engaged in a determined, systematic and successful effort to transform and tame Brown v. Board of Education. But in this article, written for a symposium on Brown at 70, I suggest a surprising counterweight to the standard narrative. If one takes modern doctrine seriously -- a big if, I concede-- it has the potential to support some progressive goals.

In particular, modern doctrine might provide progressives answers to three questions:

1. Are race-conscious but facially neutral means of increasing diversity at state institutions of higher education constitutional?
2. Are legacy admissions to state run institutions …

Roberts's Revisions: A Narratological Reading Of The Affirmative Action Cases, Angela Onwuachi-Willig

Faculty Scholarship

In a seminal article published nearly twenty years ago in the Yale Journal of Law and the Humanities, Professor Peter Brooks posed a critical yet underexplored question: "Does the [flaw [n]eed a [n]arratology?"⁵ In essence, he asked whether law as a field should have a framework for deconstructing and understanding how and why a legal opinion, including the events that the opinion is centered on, has been crafted and presented in a particular way.⁶ After highlighting that "how a story is told can make a difference in legal outcomes," Brooks encouraged legal actors to "talk narrative talk" …

Ochoa, Big Ten Law Deans Pledge Support For Diversity Ahead Of Scotus Affirmative Action Ruling, The Indiana Lawyer

Christiana Ochoa (7/22-10/22 Acting; 11/2022-)

s the U.S. Supreme Court prepares to hand down a decision that could fundamentally alter affirmative action, a group of law school deans — including Dean Christiana Ochoa of the Indiana University Maurer School of Law — has issued a statement affirming the deans’ commitment to diversity.

The group of 15 deans represent Big Ten law schools, including IU Maurer. In their statement — which IU Maurer posted to its official Facebook page — the deans say they are “joining together to affirm our commitment to advancing diversity, equity, and inclusion through legally permissible means, regardless of the outcome of …

The Supreme Court Is Poised To Reverse Affirmative Action: Here’S What You Need To Know., Richard O. Lempert

Other Publications

Sometime in the next six weeks the Supreme Court will likely reveal its decisions in Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. (SFAI) v. President and Fellows of Harvard and SFAI v. University of North Carolina. Court watchers are almost unanimous that the Supreme Court majority will:

• read the 14 amendment as barring the use of racial preferences by public colleges and universities and
• interpret Section VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act as similarly restricting race conscious admissions at any school receiving federal funds.

To achieve these outcomes a conservative majority will have to reject 40 years of a twice reaffirmed …

Facilitating Race-Conscious Targeted Purchasing Programs In The Shadow Of The Trump Judiciary, Daniel Choma

Mitchell Hamline Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Perils Of Asian-American Erasure, Matthew P. Shaw

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

Affirmative action, particularly its most well-known variant, race-conscious college admissions practices, has long occupied a precarious position in constitutional jurisprudence of equal protection and statutory antidiscrimination law. As a policy matter, affirmative action practices are necessary to reduce the impact of durable structural barriers to opportunity that have been imposed on members of identifiable racial groups because of their race. Legally, they’re on far less secure footing.

As a constitutional matter, these measures have been summarily divorced from any reparative purpose since the “diversity rationale” emerged from Regents of the University of California v. Bakke as the only compelling interest …

Ambivalent Advocates: Why Elite Universities Compromised The Case For Affirmative Action, Jonathan Feingold

Faculty Scholarship

“The end of affirmative action.” The headline is near. When it arrives, scholars will explain that a controversial set of policies could not withstand unfriendly doctrine and less friendly Justices. This story is not wrong. But it is incomplete. Critically, this account masks an underappreciated source of affirmative action’s enduring instability: elite universities, affirmative action’s formal champions, have always been ambivalent advocates.
/="/">
/="/">Elite universities are uniquely positioned to shape legal and lay opinions about affirmative action. They are formal defendants in affirmative action litigation and objects of public obsession. And yet, schools like Harvard and the University of …

Affirmative Action After Sffa, Jonathan Feingold

Faculty Scholarship

In SFFA v. Harvard (SFFA), the Supreme Court further restricted a university’s right to consider the racial identity of individual applicants during admissions. The ruling has spawned considerable confusion regarding a university’s ongoing ability to pursue racial diversity, racial inclusion, and other equality-oriented goals—whether through “raceconscious” or “race-neutral” means. To assist institutions attempting to navigate the ruling, this article outlines a set of key legal rights and responsibilities that universities continue to possess following SFFA.

Gender Identity, Sports, And Affirmative Action: What's Title Ix Got To Do With It?, Michael E. Rosman

St. Mary's Law Journal

There is much talk these days of promoting “equity” rather than “equality.” When applied outside athletics, Title IX promotes non-discrimination, usually associated with equality. As it has been applied to sports, though, it may be our most prominent “equity” statute, making sure each sex gets its fair share.

The questions this article seeks to address are legal ones that the debate about trans females seems to bring to the fore. How did we start with a statute whose language looks very similar to every other civil rights statute—and, indeed, that acts just like every other civil rights statute outside of …

Big Data Affirmative Action, Peter N. Salib

Northwestern University Law Review

As a vast and ever-growing body of social-scientific research shows, discrimination remains pervasive in the United States. In education, work, consumer markets, healthcare, criminal justice, and more, Black people fare worse than whites, women worse than men, and so on. Moreover, the evidence now convincingly demonstrates that this inequality is driven by discrimination. Yet solutions are scarce. The best empirical studies find that popular interventions—like diversity seminars and antibias trainings—have little or no effect. And more muscular solutions—like hiring quotas or school busing—are now regularly struck down as illegal. Indeed, in the last thirty years, the Supreme Court has invalidated …

Colorblind Capture, Jonathan Feingold

Faculty Scholarship

We are facing two converging waves of racial retrenchment. The first, which arose following the Civil Rights Movement, is nearing a legal milestone. This term or the next, the Supreme Court will prohibit affirmative action in higher education. When it does, the Court will cement decades of conservative jurisprudence that has systematically eroded the right to remedy racial inequality.

The second wave is more recent but no less significant. Following 2020’s global uprising for racial justice, rightwing forces launched a coordinated assault on antiracism itself. The campaign has enjoyed early success. As one measure, GOP officials have passed, proposed or …

Importing Indian Intolerance: How Title Vii Can Prevent Caste Discrimination In The American Workplace, Brett Whitley

Arkansas Law Review

"If Hindus migrate to other regions on [E]arth, [Indian] Caste would become a world problem." - Dr. B.R. Ambedkar (1916) Imagine it is the year 2020. You are one of the more than 160 million people across India that are labeled as Dalits, formerly known as the “Untouchables." Most Hindus view Dalits as belonging to the lowest rung in the ancient system of social stratification that impacts individuals across the globe called the caste system. Your people have endured human rights abuses for centuries, but luckily, neither you nor a loved one have ever been the victim of one of …

Random Justice, Girardeau A. Spann

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

As recent Senate confirmation practices suggest, the Supreme Court is best understood as the head of a political branch of government, whose Justices are chosen in a process that makes their ideological views dispositive. Throughout the nation’s history, the Supreme Court has exercised its governing political ideology in ways that sacrifice the interests of nonwhites in order to advance the interests of Whites. In the present moment of heightened cultural sensitivity to structural discrimination and implicit bias, it would make sense to use affirmative action to help remedy the racially disparate distribution of societal resources that has been produced by …

Through A Glass, Darkly: Systemic Racism, Affirmative Action, And Disproportionate Minority Contact, Robin Walker Sterling

Michigan Law Review

This Article is the first to describe how systemic racism persists in a society that openly denounces racism and racist behaviors, using affirmative action and disproportionate minority contact as contrasting examples. Affirmative action and disproportionate minority contact are two sides of the same coin. Far from being distinct, these two social institutions function as two sides of the same ideology, sharing a common historical nucleus rooted in the mythologies that sustained chattel slavery in the United States. The effects of these narratives continue to operate in race-related jurisprudence and in the criminal legal system, sending normative messages about race and …