Redefining Affirmative Action: Emerging Frontlines of the Battle

The US Supreme Court's recent decision on affirmative action in college and university admissions hinted at a potentially unsettling development beyond traditional higher education.

On October 5, the US Naval Academy was sued by the anti-affirmative action group that previously filed lawsuits against Harvard and the University of North Carolina. These lawsuits led to the nation's highest court declaring race-based admissions policies at those institutions unlawful. In a 28-page lawsuit, the conservative group Students for Fair Admissions claimed that the academy has no valid reason for using race as a factor in admissions. They argued that this policy violated the US Constitution. The group had also filed a lawsuit in September against the US Military Academy at West Point, presenting similar arguments.

The Supreme Court's June ruling stated that colleges and universities are no longer allowed to consider race as a specific factor for granting admissions, with the exception of US military service academies. The ongoing lawsuits against the US Navy and West Point signal a strong commitment by opponents of affirmative action to eradicate any racial-based diversity policies. It is not unexpected that the US Armed Forces have faced criticism from those against affirmative action.

The military in America is the institution that is most fully integrated. Its leaders enthusiastically emphasize the importance of diversity, asserting that it enhances the strength of the US armed forces. Researchers have discovered that the cities with the highest level of integration in America also have a significant military presence. Additionally, the Defense Department operates some of the nation's most integrated and academically successful schools for children.

In the early 1940s, the training program for Black officers in the US Army was integrated. After graduating from Fort Benning in Georgia on May 29, 1942, military officers 2nd Lt. Henry C. Harris, Jr., 2nd Lt. Rogers H. Beardon, 2nd Lt. Frank Frederick Doughton, and 2nd Lt. Elmer B. Kountze can be seen in the accompanying photograph.

The military actively seeks individuals from diverse racial backgrounds. The higher-ranking officials understand that achieving racial integration requires the support of leaders. However, conservative activists argue that this strategy is illegal. In the SFFA filings for the Harvard lawsuit, they refer to it as "racial balancing," where Asian American applicants face more stringent criteria compared to Black and Latino students.

SFFA founder and legal strategist Edward Blum clarified, "We do not suggest that diversity is undesirable. However, differentiating treatment based on race and ethnicity represents a distinct aspect in the pursuit of diversity."

The conservative legal movement argues that any attempt to impact the rights or privileges of racial minorities based on their race is against the constitution. Blum, who also directs The Project on Fair Representation, has been filing lawsuits challenging these policies from various angles since the 1990s.

If these lawsuits against the military reach the Supreme Court and succeed, the potential consequences they may bring could surpass even the recent affirmative action ruling.

In a surprising turn of events, the US Supreme Court's conservative majority, who previously ended affirmative action in higher education, made a significant decision in June. This decision aimed at upholding voting rights protections for African Americans.

The previous week, the decision to approve a new congressional map in Alabama was reaffirmed by a federal court. This new map aims to increase the chances of the Black population electing a Democrat in the state. Additionally, this decision could potentially aid Democrats in regaining control of the US House of Representatives. Furthermore, it may also have an impact on ongoing court challenges to Republican-drawn maps in Florida, Louisiana, and Georgia.

The accusation by voting rights activists led the case to the highest court in the country, as they claimed that Alabama's legislature, controlled by the GOP, had created a previous congressional map that weakened the political influence of Black individuals.

The U.S. Supreme Court is seen, Oct. 5, 2023, in Washington. (AP Photo/Mariam Zuhaib)

Mariam Zuhaib/AP

Legal analyst explains how the recent SCOTUS decision crucially safeguards the Voting Rights Act, a long-standing law that prohibits racially discriminatory voting practices. This decision comes after a series of rulings by the high court that had weakened the act's effectiveness, rendering it practically ineffective.

The 2013 Shelby County v. Holder decision, a result of lawsuits orchestrated by Blum, proved to be one of the most significant decisions. In this decision, a conservative majority removed a crucial enforcement mechanism that had previously protected individuals of color from being targeted at the ballot box in states with a history of racial discrimination.

This Shelby decision resulted in a surge of voter restriction laws being passed in states that were previously under the coverage of the Voting Rights Act. With the presidential election year approaching, it is anticipated that there will be an increase in lawsuits invoking the Voting Rights Act.

The decisions will be closely observed by voting rights activists to determine if the recent setback for conservative activists in Alabama was an anomaly or a prevailing trend for the high court. Furthermore, this emphasizes the significance of a UAW triumph.

In other news: If you've been following along, you may recall that in last week's newsletter, I delved deeper into the United Auto Workers' ongoing strike against Detroit's Big Three automakers. I emphasized that this strike is not solely a battle between workers and corporate power, but also encompasses a racial aspect. Highlighting this, CNN's Nathaniel Meyersohn recently penned an article exploring yet another racial dimension of the UAW strike. The article focuses on the potential economic advantage that a labor victory could provide to black workers who have long relied on employment opportunities at Detroit auto plants.

Black workers have historically relied on auto jobs as a means to establish successful careers. However, the availability of opportunities for career advancement has significantly reduced since the early 2000s. In this photo, UAW members who are on strike can be observed protesting outside GM's Willow Run Distribution Center in Belleville, Michigan on September 26.

Meyersohn highlighted the significance of union auto jobs for Black individuals as a means of achieving financial stability in the United States. Currently, the proportion of Black workers in the auto industry surpasses their representation in the broader workforce. However, Meyersohn attested that the decline in domestic auto employment and the weakening of labor unions have disproportionately affected Black workers. Since the United Auto Workers union made concessions in 2007 and 2009 during the period of automotive industry turmoil and government bailouts, many Black workers have witnessed a shift in auto employment, where it has transformed from a reliable career path to a mere wage-based job.

The outcome of the UAW strike carries significant implications for the future of the US auto industry. However, Meyersohn's account highlights the substantial impact it could have on the lives of Black workers who have relied on auto jobs as a means to upward mobility.