Justice is (color)blind: Why DEI isn’t likely to go away any time soon
Just about one year ago today, the Supreme Court struck down as illegal the race-based admissions policies of Harvard and the University of North Carolina.
Chief Justice John Roberts’s opinion in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard signaled open season on any inclusionary policy that treats individuals differently based on race. Conservative activists enjoyed quick victories against law firm “diversity fellowships,” government programs exclusively for people of color, and venture capital funding for Black women. Yet a separate side of SFFA still flies under the radar.
By doubling down on “colorblindness,” the chief justice bolstered the constitutional case for the newest target of conservatives’ ire: diversity, equity and inclusion programs, known widely as DEI.
Most DEI initiatives are not race-based in the relevant legal sense. They might serve some racial motivation, such as improving racial equality or reducing racial stereotypes, but they do not distinguish between individuals based on race.
In Supreme Court parlance, this makes DEI policies “facially neutral” and therefore, constitutionally secure.
This hasn’t stopped right-wing officials from claiming that DEI runs afoul of the Supreme Court decision. Consider a June 3 letter sent by 21 Republican attorneys general to the American Bar Association, asserting that the association's Rule 206 fails to account for the decision and, "by all appearances, directs law-school administrators to violate both the Constitution and Title VII.” The Republican attorneys general then assert that under Students for Fair Admissions, “facially neutral” practices become unlawful if “undertaken with the aim to achieve particular racial outcomes.”
As a moral and practical matter, this assertion presents immediate concerns. According to this reasoning, it would be unlawful for a university to eliminate an application fee or forgo legacy preferences if it took that action because it wanted to increase, say, Asian American enrollment. The same goes for any policy adopted to racially integrate an institution, to cultivate a welcoming climate for Black law students, or to racially diversify a legal profession that remains disproportionately white.
The Republican attorneys general and their right-wing allies have a separate problem: conservative justices.
In Students for Fair Admissions, the chief justice and his conservative colleagues berated Harvard and UNC for “separating students on the basis of race.” Yet in the same opinion, they condoned the universities’ racial motives as “plainly worthy” and “commendable.” This language tracks a notorious 2007 Roberts opinion that struck down race-based assignment plans designed to desegregate K-12 public schools. As in Students for Fair Admissions, Roberts lauded the defendants’ racial motives as “worthy” even as he barred the means they were using. The upshot is that in 2007 and 2023, the defendants lost because they employed disfavored means, not because they wanted to achieve particular racial outcomes.
Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s concurrence in the same case provides even more support for colorblind DEI efforts, reiterating the majority’s distaste for policies that distinguish between individual students based on their race. According to Kavanaugh, such policies must be “limited in time” because they are “so dangerous” and “deviat[e] from the norm of equal treatment.” But again, his concern lies with the means schools employ, not the ends they pursue. We know this, in part, because Kavanaugh concludes by noting that universities still “can, of course, act to undo the effects of past discrimination in many permissible ways that do not involve classification by race.”
This is an invitation to pursue expressly racial goals such as those embedded within the Bar Association's Rule 206 — so long as the means remain facially neutral. It might be a surprise to learn that Kavanaugh was quoting Justice Antonin Scalia, perhaps the most influential conservative justice of the last half-century. Even Scalia was open to colorblind practices that resemble many contemporary DEI initiatives.
A final data point reveals the clash between today’s conservative assault on DEI and conservative caselaw. Even before Students for Fair Admissions had concluded, the right-wing Pacific Legal Foundation sued several public high schools for adopting colorblind policies designed to increase racial diversity. The best-known lawsuit targeted Thomas Jefferson High School in Fairfax County, Va., which had rebooted its admissions policy, spurred by the racial justice protests of 2020.
The policy had been colorblind before the changes, and it remained colorblind thereafter. Pacific Legal nonetheless argued that Thomas Jefferson High School had violated the Constitution because the new policy had been adopted to alter the school’s racial make-up. The argument should sound familiar, because it’s the same one that permeates the AGs’ letter.
Pacific Legal lost in the Fourth Circuit, the appellate court that covers Virginia. Many expected the Supreme Court to take the case. Many also expected Pacific Legal to prevail. Neither occurred. The Supreme Court denied review earlier this year. Only two justices — Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas — dissented from that decision.
One should not overread the significance of Pacific Legal’s defeat. But it should reassure organizations like the American Bar Association that even this Supreme Court isn’t ready to strike down DEI, so long as the specific initiatives remain colorblind. It also highlights how radical the conservative assault on DEI has become.
Jonathan Feingold is an associate professor at Boston University School of Law. He is an expert in affirmative action, antidiscrimination law, education law, and critical race theory.
Date: |
Filter
-
CBS Sports - Sports
DeMar DeRozan free agency: Why six-time All-Star is in limbo, just like the last time he was on the market
DeRozan reportedly won't sign for the MLE, and sign-and-trades are complicated -
The New York Times - Top stories
There’s a Name for the Trap Joe Biden Faces
It’s always hard to walk away from power.Joe Biden -
The Hill - Politics
Why abortion isn’t the winning issue Democrats think it is in 2024
Biden’s party planned to run on “Dobbs and democracy,” but their pro-abortion push is losing steam.Abortion -
The Hill - Politics
Owning a house less affordable than any time in 17 years: Report
Story at a glance (NewsNation) — Buying a house in the U.S. today is less affordable than at any other time in the last 17 years, according to the real estate data company ATTOM. The typical costs of a home, including mortgage payments, property ... -
MarketWatch - Business
Tesla’s stock is on a huge run. Here’s why one bear isn’t buying the ‘euphoria.’
Guggenheim is concerned that Tesla price cuts “pulled forward” demand, which could create challenges for the future. -
The Guardian - World
Digested week: Biden’s travails and why the UK election isn’t big news in the US | Emma Brockes
Contest in Britain – between ‘the rich one, the “boring” one, and Trump’s buddy’ – has felt like a foregone conclusion. School’s out in the US, sleep-away camp has started, and as 4 July falls on a Thursday this year, lots of Americans prepare to ...United Kingdom -
The Guardian - World
Hands off the koala: why cuddling Australia’s iconic marsupial could soon be a thing of the past
Countless famous faces have been snapped snuggling up to koalas in Australia. But it’s a practice animal activists hope will become extinct. From Taylor Swift to King Charles, cuddling a koala in Australia has long been a bucket-list item for ... -
The Guardian - World
After nine years in office, is it time for Justin Trudeau to go?
After a shocking electoral upset the public is growing increasingly weary of his tenure – and of his Liberal party. A Canadian prime minister who has outstayed his welcome, persistent inflation, a government bumped and bruised by scandal and a ... -
CNBC - Business
NBA champion Jayson Tatum has a new $314 million contract, but he won't spend any of it: 'I remember what it's like to struggle'
Before he was drafted, Tatum made a deal with his mom that he would only spend endorsement money.NBA
More from The Hill
-
The Hill - Politics
Here's how the process to replace Biden works if he withdraws
Amid rising pressure for President Biden to withdraw from the race, questions are looming over the mechanics of getting another Democrat on the ballot ahead of November. Democrats do have a path forward: The filing deadline for the party to get ...Joe Biden -
The Hill - Politics
Heritage faces blowback after 'bloodless' revolution comment
The Heritage Foundation and its president, Kevin Roberts, are facing blowback in the wake of his comment about an ongoing second American revolution that will “remain bloodless if the left allows it to be.” President Biden’s campaign jumped on the ... -
The Hill - Politics
Law schools left reeling after latest Supreme Court earthquakes
The Supreme Court isn't making it easy to be a law professor these days. After overturning the 40-year-old Chevron deference last week, the justices threw law curricula for another major loop on Monday with their earth-shaking ruling on ... -
The Hill - Politics
Democrats take aim at Supreme Court with eyes on November
Democrats are aiming their fire at the Supreme Court after this week’s monumental ruling that granted former President Trump broad immunity from criminal prosecution, hoping that a messaging blitz focused on the bench could turbocharge campaigns ... -
The Hill - Politics
Trans state legislators slam White House opposition to gender-affirming surgery for minors
A group of transgender and nonbinary state legislators sent a letter to the Biden administration criticizing its decision to oppose gender-affirming surgery for minors. In the letter, the lawmakers said transgender youth in America have been under ...