1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
|
\documentclass[ignorenonframetext, aspectratio=169]{beamer}
%\documentclass[parskip=half-]{scrartcl}
%\usepackage{beamerarticle}
\usetheme{Hannover}
\usepackage{tgschola}
\usepackage{tgheros}
% \usepackage{tgcursor}
\usefonttheme{professionalfonts}
\renewcommand{\familydefault}{\rmdefault}
\usepackage{microtype}
\usepackage[notes, backend=biber, useibid=true]{biblatex-chicago} % remove noibid when fixed capitalization
\addbibresource{/home/runxiyu/phil/db.bib}
\newcommand{\nopage}{\_\_\_\_}
\newrobustcmd*{\Runcite}{\bibsentence\runcite}
\usepackage{graphicx}
\usepackage{hyperref}
\hypersetup{
colorlinks=false,
}
\only<presentation>{
\setlength{\parskip}{1ex}
}
\title{Affirmative Action, Again}
\subtitle{\textit{Students for Fair Admissions \textup{v.}\ Harvard/UNC} (2023)}
\author{Runxi Yu}
\date{August 10, 2024}
\begin{document}
\only<article>{
\maketitle
}
\only<presentation>{
\begin{frame}
\titlepage
\end{frame}
}
\only<article>{
\textbf{Note:}
You are viewing this presentation in article mode.
}
\begin{frame}[fragile]{Miscellaneous information}
\begin{itemize}
\item Except for text included within double quotation marks and text within a \verb|quote|/\verb|quotation| environment, all text in this slide show is in the public domain, available under Creative Common Zero version 1.0, or the 0-clause BSD license, at your option.
\item This does not mean that the entire slide show (especially images) is public domain. However, quotes of court opinions are public domain; see 17 U.\,S.\,C.\ {\S} 105 and \Runcite{banks}.
\item The source code of this slide show is available in \href{https://git.sr.ht/~runxiyu/philo}{\texttt{https://git.sr.ht/\~{}runxiyu/philo}}. I might send tarballs to the WeChat group.
\item This slide show uses \texttt{biblatex-chicago} for citations, which are generally of the form ``\textit{Petitioner} v.\ \textit{Respondent}, Volume U.\,S. Start-page, Page (Year)''.
\end{itemize}
\end{frame}
\section{Background}
\begin{frame}{What is SFFA \textit{v.}\ Harvard?}
\begin{itemize}
\item Harvard and UNC used to have affirmative action based on race in their admissions process.
\item SCOTUS ruled that's not okay. \Runcite{harvard}.
\end{itemize}
\end{frame}
\begin{frame}{Key question}
\begin{center}\bfseries
Is racial affirmative action a form of undue discrimination?
\end{center}
\end{frame}
\section{Statutes}
\begin{frame}{Relevant clauses in the Civil Rights Act}
\begin{block}{42 U.\,S.\,C.\ \S\ 2000d}
``No person in the United States shall, on the ground of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.''
\end{block}
\end{frame}
\begin{frame}{Relevant clauses in the 14th Amendment}
\begin{block}{Due Process Clause}
``\ldots any State [shall not] deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.''
\end{block}
\begin{block}{Equal Protection Clause}
``All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.''
\end{block}
\end{frame}
\section{Case law of the 14th}
\begin{frame}{Sample case law invloving the 14th Amendment}
\begin{itemize}
\item People formerly enslaved did not have standing in federal courts because they lacked citizenship, even after being freed. \Runcite{dred}.
\item ``[Seggregated] but equal''. \Runcite{plessy}.
\item Racial seggregation in public schools violates the 14th amendment. \Runcite{brown}.
\item States cannot refuse to recognize out-of-state marriages between gay couples. \Runcite{obergefell}.
\end{itemize}
\end{frame}
Discrimmination merely based on sexual orientation is discrimmination based on sex, which violates the civil rights act. \Runcite{bostock}
\section{\citetitle{bakke}}
\begin{frame}{Reasons for Affirmative Action?}
\Runcite{bakke}
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(i)] ``reducing the historic deficit of traditionally disfavored minorities in [...] schools''
\item[(ii)] ``countering the effects of societal discrimination''
\item[(iii)] ``obtaining the educational benefits that flow from an ethnically diverse student body''
\end{enumerate}
\end{frame}
% \appendix
\begin{frame}{Justice Powell's objections in \citetitle{bakke}}
Justice Powell observed that
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(i)] is insufficient because it was akin to ``[p]referring members of any one group for no reason other than race or ethnic origin'', the very definition of racial discrimmination
\item[(ii)] was insufficient because it was ``an amorphous concept of injury that may be ageless in its reach into the past'', \runcite[307]{bakke}. But Justice Powell recognized diversity as a compelling interest: ``[A] black student can usually bring something that a white person cannot offer.'' \Runcite[316]{bakke}.
\end{enumerate}
\end{frame}
\section{Academic diversity}
\begin{frame}{Academic diversity}
``Admissions programs fail to articulate a meaningful connection between the means they employ and the goals they pursue.'' \Runcite[\nopage{} (slip op.\ 24)]{harvard}. The court thinks that there is no meaningful connection between racial affirmative action to academically-significant diversity.
The court objects:
\begin{itemize}
\item Vague classifications (e.g. ``Asians'' is a vague category)
\item The ``belief that minority students always (or even consistently) express some characteristic minority viewpoint on any issue.''
\end{itemize}
Are there specific academic benefits that only racial diversity could bring?
\end{frame}
\section{Economic status}
\begin{frame}{Economic status}
\begin{itemize}
\item Being in a historically disadvantaged race means a higher likelyhood of having poorer economic status (and education is important to break out of this cycle)
\end{itemize}
Claim: Race is not a particularly good proxy, because of its alleged ineffectiveness evident in \citetitle{harvard}. ``While Harvard professes interest in socioeconomic diversity, for example, SFFA points to trial testimony that there are 23 times as many rich kids on campus as poor kids.'' \Runcite[\nopage{} (\textsc{Gorsuch}, J., concurring) (slip op., at 13)]{harvard} (internal quotation marks omitted).
\end{frame}
\section{Seggregation}
\begin{frame}{Seggregation}
``Passively eliminating race classifications did not suffice when \textit{de facto} seggregation persisted.'' \Runcite[\nopage{} (\textsc{Sotomayor}, J., dissenting) (slip op., at 12)]{harvard} (quoting \runcite[440–442]{green}). The court previously has also stated that a school board ``had to do more than abandon its discriminatory purpose'', it ``had an affirmative responsibility to integrate.'' \Runcite[538]{brinkman}.
But we live in a world that is vastly different from the world that existed during \citetitle{brown} and \citetitle{green}.The prevalence of anything that could be considered ``segregation'' in society should be at a minimum, or at least on an entirely different level than that of the 70s.
Is there still a compelling interest in increasing integration, with affirmative action?
\end{frame}
\section{Termination}
\begin{frame}{Termination}
``[A]ll race-conscious admissions programs [must] have a termination point''; they ``must have a logical end point''; their ``deviation from the norm of equal treatment'' must be ``a temporary matter''; ``[e]nshrining a permanent justification for racial preferences would offend this fundamental equal protection principle.'' \Runcite[342–343 (internal quotation marks omitted)]{grutter}.
Affirmative action is a policy that adapts to changing social conditions. When should affirmative action end?
\end{frame}
\section{Autonomy}
\begin{frame}{Autonomy}
``Admission is not an honor bestowed to reward superior merit or virtue. Neither the student with high test scores nor the student who comes from a disadvantaged minority group morally deserves to be admitted. Her Admission is justified insofar as it contributes to the social purpose the university serves, not because it rewards the student for her merit or virtue, independently defined.'' \Runcite[174]{justice}.
To what extent do responsibilities of the state apply to universities? To what extent should they have autonomy over admissions decisions?
\end{frame}
\end{document}
|
