The Review: Affirmative Action, Race in Admissions, and the Diversity Rationale

The Supreme Court begins hearing oral arguments today — is this the end of an era? ADVERTISEMENT [The Review Logo]( Did someone forward you this newsletter? [Sign up free]( to receive your own copy. Today, the Supreme Court will begin hearing oral arguments over race-conscious admissions. At issue is whether Grutter v. Bollinger, the 2003 case that upheld the use of race in college admissions, will stand. In September, the Review [published]( an expansive essay by the Stanford law professor Richard Thompson Ford arguing that affirmative action’s constitutionally mandated emphasis (in California v. Bakke) on diversity as an educational good, rather than as the requirement of justice toward historically oppressed groups (African Americans in particular), has derailed its mission and given rise to all kinds of confusion. Ford feels pretty certain that the court will overturn affirmative action, and he doesn’t think the particulars of the arguments for or against it will matter much — “It’s enough to count the justices nominated by Republican presidents to predict the court’s decision. Legal analysis is beside the point.” But that doesn’t mean the court’s reasoning won’t matter in some larger sense. As he goes on: Americans look to the courts not only to resolve specific disputes, but also for more broadly applicable ideas about justice. The rationales offered by the courts can shape, expand, or limit our ideals. Indeed, as the apparently imminent demise of affirmative action nears, the legal basis for the policy, diversity, has come to define the national — and even the global — discussion of racial justice. And while the ideal of diversity has encouraged modest efforts to promote racial integration, the term “diversity” has also become a lazy stand-in for any discussion of the generations of race-based exclusion and exploitation that make race-conscious hiring and college admissions necessary. In this way, “diversity” has encouraged us to ignore and minimize past injustices and distorted our understanding of what justice requires today. Whether or not you agree with Ford’s skepticism toward “the diversity rationale,” his essay is an eloquent primer on the legal history of affirmative action. All SCOTUS watchers should [read]( it. And then [sign up]( for Fernanda Zamudio-Suarez’s forthcoming four-week Chronicle series on the history of race in college admissions (details below). Study up on race in college admissions. For years Americans have debated, litigated, legislated, and voted on affirmative action and race-conscious admissions (not the same thing). Now the U.S. Supreme Court is weighing two cases that may seal the practices’ fate. Meanwhile, our new, free newsletter, [Race in Admissions]( will walk you through the history of this issue. This newsletter isn’t like others, including the one you’re reading. It’s a limited-run series. For four weeks, every Tuesday and Thursday, you’ll get an email digging into The Chronicle’s archive to explain how this debate has evolved. Don’t miss out. [Sign up here](. ADVERTISEMENT REGISTER NOW [Join us January 9-27]( for a virtual professional development program on overcoming the challenges of the department chair role and creating a strategic vision for individual and departmental growth. [Reserve your spot]( before November 4 and use code EARLYBIRD2023 to save $200. The Latest THE REVIEW | ESSAY [Free Speech and Unfree Universities]( By Joshua Clover [STORY IMAGE]( On the sinister two-step by which administrators persecute the faculty. ADVERTISEMENT THE REVIEW | OPINION [No, Berkeley Isn’t Discriminating Against Jews]( By Mohammad Fadel [STORY IMAGE]( Student groups have a right to impose a moral choice about Zionism. THE REVIEW | OPINION [Yes, Berkeley Is Silencing Jews]( By Steven Lubet [STORY IMAGE]( A defense of student bans on “Zionists” misses the point. THE REVIEW | OPINION [How Conservative Colleges Win the Culture Wars]( By Adam Laats [STORY IMAGE]( Academic-freedom crackdowns get the headlines, but the real fight is elsewhere. Recommended - “While political leaders focused on developing rituals and monuments to help bind the French nation together, Durkheim laid down the theoretical framework for inculcating a secular morality that would underpin a new patriotism.” In Jacobin, Kieran Allen [explains]( how Émile Durkheim’s politics conditioned his social theory. - “The American novelist is standing in the middle of a charnel house, with blood dripping off the walls, writing little autofictions about the time someone was rude to them in their MFA.” In The Point, Sam Kriss [writes about]( mass shootings and literature. - “Goldsmith may be the little guy here, but a ruling for her would eviscerate a legal defense that has long protected underdogs from costly litigation.” In TNYRB, Liza Batkin [describes the stakes]( of Andy Warhol v. Goldsmith, currently before the Supreme Court. Write to me at len.gutkin@chronicle.com. Yours, Len Gutkin FROM THE CHRONICLE STORE [Diverse Leadership for a New Era - The Chronicle Store]( [Diverse Leadership for a New Era]( Diversity in leadership can help support colleges’ mission as enrollments of low-income and minority students increase. [Order your copy today]( to explore whether colleges are meeting goals they set following the 2020 racial justice movement and implementing best practices to recruit and support an inclusive administration. NEWSLETTER FEEDBACK [Please let us know what you thought of today's newsletter in this three-question survey](. This newsletter was sent to {EMAIL}. [Read this newsletter on the web](. [Manage]( your newsletter preferences, [stop receiving]( this email, or [view]( our privacy policy. © 2022 [The Chronicle of Higher Education]( 1255 23rd Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20037