Supreme Court Decision on Affirmative Action Will Have Devastating Effects

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. HORSFORD. Mr. Speaker, thank you, Congresswoman Sheila Cherfilus- McCormick and Congressman Jonathan Jackson, for co-chairing tonight's Special Order Hour.

I rise today with my colleagues of the Congressional Black Caucus to address the recent Supreme Court ruling in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard and UNC.

The Supreme Court determined in a 6-3 vote that race-based affirmative action programs in college admissions processes violated Title Six of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as well as the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

The Supreme Court's decision to strike down decades of precedent set in the Bakke case in 1978, which gave students--regardless of their race or ethnicity--a better chance at equal admissions to our nation's top schools was a needless blow to America's promise of equal and fair opportunity.

We have to be clear on what this decision means for the legacy of the Court and what this decision will mean for race-conscious admissions policies across our country.

By delivering a decision on affirmative action so radical as to deny young people seeking an education equal opportunity in our education system, the Supreme Court has thrown into question its own legitimacy.

By imposing these radical changes to college and university race- based admission policies, the Court has made clear that it does not stand on the side of dismantling barriers to give our young people the opportunity at a better life, which will only stand to benefit the wealthy and well-connected.

Unfortunately, we have seen backlash to progress many times throughout our Nation's history. During Reconstruction, we had a mere 12 years of Black achievement in policy, politics, the arts and sciences, and education that were followed by 70 years of state- sanctioned Jim Crow.

We didn't stop fighting for equality then and we won't stop now because too much is at stake to allow extremists to turn back the clock on progress or to use Affirmative Action as a cultural wedge issue.

That is why the CBC is proud to work alongside our Tri-Caucus colleagues to make clear that we will not be divided because our Nation's diversity is our greatest strength.

I want to thank my colleagues of the CBC, including Representative Bobby Scott, Ranking Member of the Education and the Workforce Committee for their work on this issue and for being united in making clear that decision does not take the responsibility off of colleges and universities to do all they can to expand access to educational opportunities for students coming from underrepresented communities.

The CBC is calling for colleges and universities to not only work towards diversifying their campuses to more closely reflect America, but also to reevaluate their legacy admissions programs because while the Court went so far as to eliminate race-conscious admissions practices, it did nothing about other determining factors such as legacy status.

In fact, a lawsuit has been filed against Harvard University, saying that the legacy admissions programs that give preferential treatment to the children of wealthy donors and alumni discriminates against students of color who have the academic merit to attend the school.

As such applicants with donor relationships, athletic recruitments, employee relationships, and other special recommendations will continue to receive preferential treatment.

Giving unequal opportunity to an education for legacy admissions starkly contrasts the message we need to send our young people and threatens any progress we have made in providing equal access and diverse learning environments for students across our country.

And while no Nevada institutions of higher education implemented race consideration in admissions, Nevadans of color who want to attend schools out of state, like Harvard, MIT, Georgia Tech, or other schools, will suffer as a result of this decision.

Let me be clear--our students have the merit, academic credentials, knowledge, and drive to succeed at these schools. But we cannot turn a blind eye to the history of our nation that has prioritized wealth and access. At the same time, families of color have battled generations of discrimination and racism that limited their access to quality education and wealth building.

This decision specifically exempted military academies. Why?

Race can be a factor when police stop someone on the streets. Why?

But race cannot be a factor in deciding whether someone can pursue a higher education. Why not?

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source