Tagged: diversity in higher education

June 23, 2014

Justice Sonia Sotomayor publicly defends AFFIRMATIVE ACTION, but what good are her views (or mine for that matter) if she will always constitute the SCOTUS MINORITY on this issue and others related to civil rights?

Justice Sonia Sotomayor said she supports affirmative action in higher education because she believes that alternatives based on geographic or economic status don’t work to ensure a diverse student body.

Sotomayor has said race-conscious programs in the 1970s that opened the Ivy League to minorities were essential to her rise from the Bronx housing projects to her admissions to Princeton and Yale Law School, where she excelled.

In a segment taped for ABC’s “This Week,” George Stephanopoulos asked Sotomayor, the court’s first Latina, about programs that might increase diversity in higher education that would be “less fractious” than the use of race.

She said other programs have not proven to be as successful in diversifying student bodies and that universities should be able to consider race and not just academic measurements.

“What does qualifications mean in an academic setting?” she said. “A place like Princeton could fill their entire beginning freshman class with students who have scored perfectly on undergraduate metrics.

“They don’t do it because it would not make for a diverse class on the metrics that they think are important for success in life.”

Reminded that President Obama has said his children should not receive special consideration for their race, because of their privileged backgrounds, Sotomayor said: “I agree. But even privileged people will show you dramatic accomplishment that doesn’t go just to grades.”

It is unusual for Supreme Court justices to appear on television, but most make exceptions when they have a book to promote. Sotomayor has actively promoted her memoir, “My Beloved World,” released in paperback this year.

Majority of justices who sit on the Supreme Court were appointed by Republican presidents. This has generally resulted in a 5-4 vote (or worse) to uphold and protect the interests of whites. This is not accidental or “due to chance.”