1890 University Responses to the Supreme Court's Recent Decision on Affirmative Action
In light of the historic and extremely severe decision handed down by the Supreme Court on affirmative action this week, a few 1890 University presidents responded. Here is a collection of those responses below with links provided to the full statements …
DSU President, Dr. Tony Allen
I don’t need to explain to members of the Historically Black College and University (HBCU) community — or anyone who’s made even an informal study of the ‘separate but equal’ circumstances that predicated our founding — that race is most certainly a “plus factor” in admissions — admission to higher ed institutions, entrance to prisons, consideration in courts, treatment in medical settings, and on and on. Race is a “plus factor” because it’s been, for centuries, a “minus factor.” And our contemporary environment is a result of hundreds of years of uneven enactment of our founding principles.
One can argue about whether a policy like affirmative action would ever reach its natural end. This is not an unworthy question, but, today, the need remains. Inequality remains.
UMES President, Dr. Heidi M. Anderson
Affirmative action is not a crutch. It’s not an unfair advantage. It should not be illegal as a variable in the college admissions process.
For decades, it has helped level the playing field to obtain a college education for so many who have the academic capability to achieve.
It has also been a positive force for making inroads for diversity in the college experience, something that produces real rewards in today’s increasingly diverse workforce. With today’s decision, we have lost something of benefit to everyone.
VSU President, Dr. Makola M. Abdullah
“We are aware of and stand with the wide range of voices who regret today’s Supreme Court ruling, which will impact the college enrollment of black and other minority students by potentially ending the consideration of race as one of many factors in deciding admissions. Education is the greatest equalizer for marginalized populations for whom affirmative action laws were originally intended to uplift and protect. This ruling is a step backward, potentially closing doors to equity, diversity, and inclusion.