I’m a high school teacher in Tacoma. Ending affirmative action is bad for my students | Opinion

In a recent decision, the United States Supreme Court ruled against affirmative action, overlooking the Constitution’s race-conscious vision, and dealing a blow to the progress made in the pursuit of equality.

While the decision may appear to uphold fairness on the surface, it inadvertently reinforces the advantages enjoyed by the privileged few — wealthy, white, male applicants – and perpetuates historical injustices. By failing to acknowledge that the Constitution is not color-blind but rather race-conscious, the Court undermines the importance of affirmative action and jeopardizes the fight against systemic inequalities.

The argument that affirmative action is unconstitutional ignores the intention of a fundamental pillar of Civil Rights actions in America since reconstruction after the Civil War — the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment. During recent oral arguments, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson spoke about the myth of a “color-blind” constitution and that the essence of this seminal constitutional provision was intentionally race-conscious, not race-neutral. Throughout history, the Supreme Court has used past precedents and the 14th Amendment to uphold race-conscious policies in the U.S. One of the most renowned examples is Brown v. Board of Education, which mandated the desegregation of public schools, emphasizing the constitutional imperative for racially integrated schools with equal access to education.

This history shows race-conscious college admissions have deep roots in the Constitution. Affirmative action was conceived as an extension of this race-conscious intention in order to rectify centuries of systemic discrimination and marginalization suffered by traditionally underserved communities. It sought to level the playing field and offer opportunities to those who have been historically undervalued. By allowing colleges to consider the value of race, ethnicity, and gender as factors in admissions, we allow them to create diverse academic institutions that better reflect our society. The Supreme Court’s decision has stripped colleges of the power to embrace these values, effectively undermining the progress made in pursuit of a more inclusive society.

The court also argues that affirmative action is no longer necessary and, even more perplexing, may even be harmful to marginalized communities. We are not living in a post-racial society. I witness this every day with the students I work with at Lincoln High School in Tacoma. I see the frustrating reality that they are deprived of opportunities to meet the “traditional” metrics of college applications; access to SAT/ACT tutors, college prep courses, varied extracurricular activities, and social capital. But this doesn’t diminish their value and potential.

Although these students may be starting at a disadvantage compared to those from Mercer Island, their starting point does not determine their potential outcome — if given equal opportunities. The barriers placed on my students and students just like them have nothing to do with their abilities, work ethic or potential as a student. Rather, it reflects the inheritance of centuries of discriminatory systems to which they were born.

Relying solely on these traditional metrics leaves my students behind, raising the question: Why are only these metrics valued? The Supreme Court’s decision against affirmative action limits the ability of colleges and universities to exercise flexibility and individual evaluation in their admissions processes. My students have incredible value and are more than capable of greatness. Their potential cannot be reduced to a set of standardized numbers, and colleges should be empowered to make nuanced, context-aware decisions that prioritize the value of diversity, inclusivity and the well-being of their campus community.

Why is it that our society readily accepts advantage in the form of inherited wealth and social connections but balks at valuing the perspectives, experiences, and minds of a diverse community? Affirmative action is present in many forms throughout society, but when it benefits people of color it often faces opposition and outcry. This Supreme Court decision has regrettably shifted the overwhelming advantage back to those who have historically received it — wealthy, white, male applicants. It ingrains the notion that birthright and entitlement should dictate success rather than promoting the principle of equal opportunity for all.

The Court’s decision to dismantle affirmative action sends a disheartening message about our commitment to rectify historical injustices and foster a more equitable society. Pushback to racial equality is about as American as the relentless pursuit of social justice. But, I am optimistic that the arc of change will continue to bend towards justice, because that is what my students deserve.

Ultimately, I have faith that academic institutions will continue to find ways to create diverse communities because it matters, not only to those directly affected but also for the collective growth and progress of our society as a whole.

Megan Holyoke is a Nationally Board Certified Teacher at Lincoln High School in Tacoma. She is also a co-host of the Channel 253 Network’s podcast, Interchangeable White Ladies.