Though the public has steadily turned against
affirmative action schemes—and courts continue to limit their
use—Associate Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor remains a
steadfast defender of race-based college admissions.
In an interview with ABC’s George Stephanopoulos on
Sunday, Sotomayor offered an interesting glimpse into her mindset
on the issue. She maintained that race-based affirmative action was
the only reliable way to ensure campus diversity.
Stephanopoulos asked her whether it made more sense for
admissions offices to consider regional or economic background
instead of race. Her
answer was definitive:
Well, the problem with that answer is that it doesn’t
work. It’s not that I don’t believe it works, I don’t think the
statistics show that it works. It just doesn’t.
But perhaps more shocking was that she defended affirmative
action by likening it to legacy admission—a practice that
virtually everyone who knows about it hates (some 75 percent of
Americans, according
to The New York Times), except Sotomayor,
apparently:
Look, we have legacy admissions. If your parents or your
grandparents have been to that school, they’re going to give you an
advantage in getting into the school again. Legacy admission is a
wonderful thing because it means even if you’re not as qualified as
others you’re going to get that slight advantage.
Is it “wonderful” that the scions of politically and financially
well-connected families get to be judged on their last names,
rather than on their academic merit? It seems like Sotomayor thinks
legacy admissions are somehow helping the disadvantaged, when in
reality they do the opposite.
This isn’t abstract, theoretical, or even disputable. In
2009, Princeton accepted 40 percent of applicants whose parents
were alumni,
according to Inside Higher Ed. That was 4.5 times
higher than the rate of admission for non-legacy applicants. People
who didn’t have famous parents got penalized when they applied to
Princeton, plain and simple. That’s the system Sotomayor just said
was “wonderful.”
Why should admittance to elite colleges be inherited like an
aristocratic title? And why on earth would a Supreme Court justice
whose ostensible concern is fostering diversity and assisting
disadvantaged minorities be in favor of such a system?
Foes of inequality who criticize race-based affirmative action
should demand the end of legacy admissions with equal fervor. It
boggles the mind to think they would have Sotomayor against them in
this fight, too.
Read Reason‘s Shikha Dalmia on why legacy preferences
are the “original
sin” of admissions policies.
from Hit & Run http://ift.tt/Tp299f
via IFTTT