Reactions from university administrators to the recent Supreme Court decision show what they lose by being one-sided.
Reactions from university administrators to the recent Supreme Court decision show what they lose by being one-sided.
T he Supreme Court just struck down affirmative action in higher education. Since the Court agreed to hear the case last fall, university faculties and administrators have amplified student protests in support of their race-based admissions policies. But this has come at a cost: In promoting one-sided student activism, universities have violated their historic commitment to free inquiry and intellectual diversity.
Last fall, as a light Washington drizzle turned into torrential downpour, students standing at the steps of the Supreme Court raised their poster boards reading “Race-Conscious Admissions Are Fair Admissions” and “Asian Americans for Affirmative Action” overhead for protection. Inside, the justices listened to oral arguments in two cases concerning race-based admissions practices, at Harvard and at the University of North Carolina, that had the potential to overturn years of precedent on affirmative action.
School administrators supported these student protests — some even funded them. The dean’s office at Yale College paid for travel and overnight stays in Washington for 40 students from the school’s four racial organizing groups. The Harvard Undergraduate Association approved nearly $3,000 to cover travel by the Harvard Affirmative Action Coalition to and from the Supreme Court. Princeton’s dean of undergraduate students did not send students to Washington but agreed to organize an on-campus protest.
These universities explain their support for affirmative action in an amicus brief filed in the Supreme Court last fall. Race-conscious admissions policies, the schools argue, are essential to preserving diversity — not for diversity’s own sake but because “diversity fosters a more robust spirit of free inquiry and encourages dialogue that sparks new insights.” Protecting this diverse intellectual environment is a noble pursuit, but school administrators have been shortsighted in their approach. By supporting one-sided, pro-affirmative-action activism, they undermine the free inquiry and dialogue they supposedly seek to achieve.
Protests sponsored by academic institutions is not new. When the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade last spring, students took to the streets with their universities behind them. At Dartmouth and Yale, faculty joined student protests and applauded their efforts to protect abortion access. At the University of California and the University of Michigan, the administrations released statements expressing “grave concern” about the decision. At Harvard’s Kennedy School, eight professors explained why the decision was wrong and how it might endanger civil rights.
On Friday, students again flocked to the Supreme Court after the decision against affirmative action. And, again, they had their universities behind them. Peter Salovey, the president of Yale, sent an email to the university community, describing himself as “deeply troubled” by the Court’s ruling. Ron Daniels, president of Johns Hopkins University, called the decision a “significant setback in our efforts to build a university community that represents the rich diversity of America.” Leadership from other top universities echoed Salovey and Daniels in expressing their disagreement with the decision.
It is easy to see why conservative Supreme Court decisions have made universities hotbeds for student activism. What other demographics are more affected by decisions on race-conscious admissions and abortion access than young adults in their early twenties? Those who worry about racial equity in school admissions and about restricted abortion access should be exercising their rights to protest. But when faculty and administrators support this one-sided student activism, free inquiry and dialogue on campus suffer.
In May 2020, Gallup and the Knight Foundation conducted a study of over 3,000 undergraduates to measure free expression on college campuses. They found that 63 percent of students said that the climate on their campus prevents some people from expressing their beliefs or opinions. The study also found that less than half of self-identified conservatives (49 percent) believe that conservative students can speak freely and openly on their campus.
In October 2022, the Yale Buckley Institute released the findings of its own survey of free speech at American universities. Of the students surveyed, 58 percent reported feeling intimidated in sharing an opinion that was different from a professor’s. A higher percentage, 63, reported feeling intimidated in sharing opinions different from those of their peers. If we take these responses at their word, there is more at stake on college campuses right now than racial diversity. Spaces for inquiry, free expression, and diversity of thought have never been more vulnerable.
Last fall, the New York Times asked a diverse group of twelve college students whether they supported affirmative action. In responses that surprised their surveyors, minority students worried that their peers “assume they are on campus only because of affirmative action.” Others expressed concern that affirmative action exacerbated racial tensions on campus. As affirmative action returns to the national spotlight, diverse opinions, including those, need to be voiced. Free inquiry and expression at universities depends on it. But that will not be possible if students with unpopular views watch their professors and administrators fund more protests, release more condemnations, and continue to amplify loud, persistent, one-sided student activism.
University faculties and administrators should keep any further views on affirmative action out of campus discourse and let students come to their own conclusions on the Supreme Court’s decision. In their amicus brief filed in support of affirmative action last fall, various universities claimed to believe in the “robust spirit of free inquiry” and in “dialogue that sparks new insights.” Releasing one-sided statements instead of facilitating open dialogue has done a disservice to those values. But when students return in the fall, universities across the country will have another opportunity to let their actions speak louder than their words.