The rationale for affirmative action (AA) being overturned by SCOTUS: an informational perspective of its pros and cons for the American dream

• Date: 26 December 2023
• Pages: 670-692
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/EDI-08-2023-0261
• Published date: 26 December 2023
• Author: Bahaudin Ghulam Mujtaba

The rationale for affirmative

action (AA) being overturned

by SCOTUS: an informational

perspective of its pros and cons

for the American dream

Bahaudin Ghulam Mujtaba

Management Department, College of Business and Entrepreneurship,

Nova Southeastern University, Fort Lauderdale, Florida, USA

Abstract

Purpose –This paper aims to provide a historical overview of AA, its purpose and benefits, the legal rationale

for the SCOTUS ruling and what it means for collegesand the workplace regarding equitable opportunities for

minority groups (which include women, Blacks, Hispanics, Asians and other low-income populations), as they

aim for the “American dream”.

Design/methodology/approach –SCOTUS decision and rationale, along with literature.

Findings –The race-based affirmative action (AA) precedent was recently overturned by the Supreme Court of

the UnitedStates (SCOTUS) in thecase of Students for FairAdmission (SFFA), Inc.vs President and Fellowsof

Harvard College/University of North Carolina. SCOTUS ruled that race cannot be a specific basis for college

admission. In other words, public and private colleges and universities will no longer be able to consider “race”as a

factor indeciding which qualifiedapplicants shouldbe admitted to enhance thediversity of their studentbody.

Originality/value –This is an original analysis.

Keywords Affirmative action, SCOTUS on AA, College admission criteria, Race-based admissions,

Colorblind criteria, Equity, Inclusion

Paper type Professional insights

Introduction

On June 29, 2023, nearly a half-century of affirmative action precedent of using “race”in college

admissions measures was overturned by the Supreme Court of the United States. Many

conservative Americanswere quick towelcome the SupremeCourt’s6–3rulingbanningtheuse

of race in college admissions, which could have a significant impact on college acceptance

policies across the country. However, others who want inclusion, equity and accessibility for all

rued the SCOTUS decision to ban the use of “race-based”affirmative actionoption. Manybelieve

that “equal educational opportunity is a prerequisite to achieving racial equality in our Nation”

(Sotomayor, 2023, p. 2). Regardless of whetherone welcomes theruling or is disappointedby it,

academicinstitutionsand workplacemanagers willneed to strategizeto recruit andretain a pool

of diverse population through other practical and legal means.

Some Americans (Crusto, 2023;Mujtaba, 2023a,b) believe that the AA precedent was

overturned “prematurely”because many qualified minorities in the USA today still do not

aim for their dream jobs due to existing prejudices or lack of opportunity and sufficient role

models. SCOTUS ruled that race cannot be a specific basis for college admission. This

decision is likely to have a negative impact on some disadvantaged minorities’hope of aiming

to get into the top schools. As a professor, I have never seen a university that accepted

students because they were White, Black, Native American, Asian or Hispanic. Similarly,

Justice Sotomayor (2023, p. 48) explained that “After extensive discovery and two lengthy

trials, neither SFFA (Students for Fair Admissions) nor the majority can point to a single

EDI

43,4

670

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:

https://www.emerald.com/insight/2040-7149.htm

Received 14 August 2023

Revised 12 October 2023

Accepted 7 December 2023

Equality, Diversity and Inclusion:

An International Journal

Vol. 43 No. 4, 2024

pp. 670-692

© Emerald Publishing Limited

2040-7149

DOI 10.1108/EDI-08-2023-0261

example of an underrepresented racial minority who was admitted to Harvard or UNC on the

basis of ‘race alone’.”According to Crusto (2023, p. 224), “race-conscious admissions are one of

many needed means of providing Black people the resources to participate on the same

playing field as their White counterparts and to enjoy long-overdue economic benefits.”So,

race has never been the main criteria for admitting students since colleges admit candidates

based on their prior qualifications (such as successful high school completion, GPA score,

writing ability, scores in math or science, etc.) (Holzer and Neumark, 1999).

The SCOTUS decision is not a reflection of the collective moral or fairness view in

America. Most Americans understand that AA is necessary in the USA. Regarding the

question of “is affirmative action necessary?”in the U.S., out of about 40,000 respondents, over

60% voted “YES”on CNN’s Michael Smerconish show (June 17, 2023). AA initiatives can

enhance diversity, inclusion, equity and the overall richness of discussions within teams and

between culturally different individuals (Holzer and Neumark, 2000;Jones and Nichols, 2020;

Mujtaba, 2023a,b).

While periodically it might be necessary to bring about positive changes, SCOTUS did not

propose any new optimistic initiatives, but they did stop the continuation of a concept that

has been encouraging minorities of all backgrounds (such as women, Blacks, Hispanics,

Asians and other low-income students) to aim for what was once deemed impossible in the

American society. For example, while affirmative action never advocated for the acceptance

of unqualified students into a university or hiring of an inept professional into a private or

public sector management job, it did motivate everyone to at least aim for and apply to have, a

seat at the highest table. It should be made clear that AA is not just about race, since White

women also have benefited from such initiatives that have motivated qualified females to

apply for higher management positions, instead of accepting traditional jobs in such fields or

professions as teaching, nursing, cashiering, etc (Crenshaw, 2006;Wise, 1998;Kohn, 2013;

Guynn, 2023).

College administrators and corporate recruiters must continue to discover and implement

additional means of motivating all young people to aim for their highest goals so they can

diversify their incoming candidates through the stages of attracting, accepting, retaining and

developing top talent.

While Justice Clarence Thomas, a Black American (Plate 1), was a beneficiary of such

groundbreaking concepts as AA, it is interesting that he, along with several other Justices,

voted to end it, prematurely. As such, understanding Justice Thomas’s reasoning will be

interesting. America has greatly benefited from its diverse population in the classrooms and

boardrooms; therefore, schools should encourage the inclusion of students of all races/colors,

economic status, religions and genders to aim for their highest dreams.

Despite the SCOTUS overturning AA initiatives based on race at academic

institutions, many experts believe thatAAisneededinacademiaasamotivating

factor, and at the workplace to achieve a competitive advantage in today’s global world.

For example, Professor Mitchelle “Mitch”F. Crusto (2023,p.206)writesthat“Based on

my personal experience, I plea for a continued commitment to diversity, equity, and

inclusion through the use of race-conscious admissions policies in higher education and

professional schools.”According to Michelle Obama, the former first lady, it is a

heartbreaking decision as some young minority students are wondering what their future

holds after the Supreme Court’s ruling to ban the use of affirmative action in college

admissions (CBS News, 2023). As explained by the former U.S. President, Barack Obama,

AA, althoughnot perfect, did allow “generations of students like Michelle and me to prove

we belonged.”

As can be observed from the political discourse among the legal and political science

experts over the past decade, many believe that the SCOTUS institution has been hyper-

politicized in recent years (Kowalski, 2023;Nelson and Gibson, 2019). Additionally, the

Rationale for

AA being

overturned

671