Race & Selective School Admissions After SFFA (2023)

Healing Through Policy: A Guide for Public Health Agencies.

Editorial: Advancing Our Commitment to Antiracist Scholarship

Over the past thirty years, the Democratic party has carried the mantle of racial liberalism. The party's endorsements of equal rights, fair housing laws and school busing have cost it the support of some whites, but these losses have been concentrated at the periphery of the party, among those least committed to its guiding principles or most unsympathetic to its efforts on behalf of racial equality. We argue that with the rise of affirmative action as the primary vehicle to advance racial equality, racial politics have become divisive in a new way, and that opposition to affirmative action now encompasses whites within the liberal core of the Democratic party.Contrasting traditional survey measures of affirmative action attitudes with an experimentally-based, unobtrusive measure of opposition to affirmative action, we show that racially liberal whites are reluctant to admit their anger over racial preferences when confronted with traditional survey questions in a telephone interview. When measured with an unobtrusive instrument, however, white opposition to affirmative action is found to be just as strong among liberals as conservatives, among Democrats as Republicans, and among those most committed to racial harmony and equality as among those least committed to such values. We argue that whites' anger over affirmative action stems less from a lack of concern with racial equality than from a commitment to individual achievement and self-reliance. Thus, while core constituents of the Democratic party are more opposed to affirmative action than has previously been recognized, the Democrats can draw strength from the enduring commitment of many whites to the goal of racial equality.

The advent of online media, and particularly social media, has led to scholarly debates about their implications. Authoritarian countries are interesting in this respect because social media might facilitate open and critical debates that are not possible in traditional media. China is arguably the most relevant and interesting case in this respect, because it limits the influx of non-domestic social media communication, has established its own microcosm of social media and tries to closely monitor and control it and censor problematic content. While such censorship is very effective in some instances, however, it fails to shut down all open debates completely. We analyse the pre-eminent Chinese social media platform – Sina Weibo – and present a typology of different kinds of public spheres that exist on this platform in which open and critical debates can occur under specific circumstances: Thematic public spheres include phenomena of common concern, such as environmental pollution or food safety; short-term public spheres emerge after unexpected events; encoded public spheres are deliberate attempts of users to circumvent censorship; local public spheres focus on sub-national phenomena and problems; non-domestic political public spheres exist on political topics from other countries but are often referenced back to China; mobile public spheres exist because many people use Weibo on their smartphones and also have access to deleted content there and meta public spheres are debates about censorship itself.

This essay examines the significance of the fortuitous Fisher v. University of Texas Supreme Court decision within a broader historical framework of similar affirmative action legal disputes. The author locates Fisher among a historical trajectory of manoeuvres intended to destabilise modest Civil Rights Era advances toward racial justice. Leonardo’s ‘educational criticism’ is considered as a possible conceptual analysis to take up the continuing problem of race, education and the law in our colour-blind era. Despite the Fisher decision affirming the continued permissibility of limited racial considerations in college admissions, a careful examination of how race is understood from a legal perspective reveals a disconcerting revelation. That is, racial justice advocates in education should temper our enthusiasm for Fisher against evidence that the Supreme Court’s understanding of racism has unquestionably gone backwards. Because of this, Fisher is at best a problematic step toward meaningful integration, and at worst an instantiation of whiteness rising.

Asreported by the World Health Organization, a novel coronavirus (COVID-19) was identified as the causative virus of new viral pneumonia of unknown etiology by Chinese authorities on 7 January 2020. The virus was named COVID-19 and because of its ability to cause severe acute respiratory syndrome (i.e., SARS) this infection has also been defined as SARS-CoV2.Furthermore, an association between COVID-19 infection and venous thromboembolism has been reported in several series around the world.For this reason, methods used to improve diagnostic tools, pharmacological thromboprophylaxis and type of anticoagulants are discussed in this expert opinion.

Using cigarettes to change client behaviour is a common, yet little studied, practice in mental health care. A questionnaire survey was used to explore mental health nursing student's experiences and attitudes to this practice. The sample was four cohorts of mental health nursing students (n= 151). Of them, 84% had experienced the practice of using cigarettes to change client behaviour in acute wards (73%), rehabilitation wards (28%) and elderly care (14%). Cigarettes were used to change client behaviour in areas such as attending to personal hygiene (57%) or engaging in the ward routine (39%). However, items such as leave (60%) or drinks (tea and coffee) (38%) were also reportedly used. Of the respondents, 54% inferred that the practice did not work well with 46% stating it was not written up in care plans; 52% felt it was an ad hoc practice, 60% inferred that at times it was used as a punishment while 55% intimated that they felt bad withholding cigarettes. There are ethical and moral dilemmas around using lifestyle risk factors as rewards or using client's nicotine addiction as a means of controlling behaviour. The question of whether this intervention should ever be used, given its associated health risk, requires more critical debate in clinical practice.

The use of race in college admissions is one of the most contentious issues in US higher education. We survey the literature on the impact of racial preferences in college admissions on both minority and majority students. With regard to minority students, particular attention is paid to the scope of preferences as well as how preferences affect graduation, choice of major, and labor market earnings. We also examine how schools respond to bans on racial preferences and the effects these responses have on racial diversity at elite schools. With regard to majority students, we examine the evidence on the returns to attending a more racially diverse school, as well as how racial preferences affect friendship formation. Finally, we supplement studies of affirmative action in the United States with evidence from India, which provides a much more straightforward environment in which to study affirmative action owing to the use of quotas and admissions rules based solely on exam scores.

In 2023, the Supreme Court of the United States effectively ended race-based affirmative action in college admissions with their decision in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard . Asian Americans were featured prominently in the case and broader discourse, even though a majority (69%) of Asian Americans support such policies. Here, a socio-historical approach helps to understand how Asian Americans have been positioned against affirmative action according to Racial Triangulation Theory and stereotypes rooted in the model minority myth. Two areas of research and theory (privilege and inter-minority group relations) suggest social psychologically informed policy recommendations and areas of advocacy. Ultimately, racial justice and equity can be achieved through an inter-minority group coalition built on an understanding of history, development of critical race consciousness, and informed community engagement.

The number of publications on the topic of diversity, equity, and inclusion in plastic surgery has increased exponentially in the last 5 years. Numerous changes have been implemented. On June 29, 2023, the US Supreme Court ruled that affirmative action in college admissions is unconstitutional. Writing for the majority, Justice Roberts concluded that eliminating racial discrimination means eliminating all of it, and the Equal Protection Clause applies without regard to any differences of race, of color, or of nationality. Justice Thomas authored a concurrence, stating that such policies are contrary to our colorblind constitution and our nation's equality ideal. Justice Sotomayor was joined by Justice Kagan and Justice Jackson in their dissenting opinion that ignoring race will not equalize a society that is racially unequal and that students of various racial backgrounds can offer different perspectives because of that identity. The reaction was largely partisan. Michelle Steel and Young Kim, Republican Asian American Congresswomen from California, lauded the decision, along with Republican Senator Tim Scott from South Carolina. Senate Majority Leader Democrat Chuck Schumer opined that the Supreme Court decision has put a "giant roadblock in our country's march toward racial justice." Cory Booker, New Jersey Democrat, called the decision a devastating blow. President Joe Biden and former First Lady Michelle Obama also disagreed with the decision. Profound ramifications across our institutions of higher learning and in medical specialties are likely to follow. Legally, it will be difficult or impossible to defend race-based preferences going forward. This is true regardless of whether such policies were put in place with the best of intentions.

Affirmative action is one of the most divisive and contentious legal and policy issues in the United States. It would have been difficult to predict the path this issue would take, however, given its somewhat inconspicuous beginnings. Affirmative action entered U.S. politics legally and linguistically with the signing of Executive Order 10,925 by President John F. Kennedy.1 This Order was intended to prohibit racial discrimination in the hiring and contracting practices of the federal government. The pertinent language reads: “The contractor will not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, creed, color, or national origin. The contractor will take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed, and that employees are treated during employment, without regard to their race, creed, color, or national origin” (Kennedy 1961; emphasis added). In the decades that followed, affirmative action would come to be seen by many in the United States as tangible evidence that the government is committed to achieving substantive social justice and racial equality. At the same time, affirmative action is also viewed by many others in the United States as fundamentally inconsistent with the notion that the U.S. Constitution is, in Justice Harlan’s famous phrase, “color-blind” (Plessy 1896, 559).KeywordsAffirmative ActionMinority StudentAdmission DecisionAffirmative Action ProgramFourteenth AmendmentThese keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

This Article investigates the potential ramifications of Fisher v. Texas and the future of race-conscious university admissions. Although one cannot predict the ultimate significance of the Fisher decision, its brief and pregnant statements of law portends an increasingly perilous course for traditional affirmative action programs. Part I explores the opinions filed in Fisher, with a particular emphasis on Justice Kennedy’s opinion on behalf of the Court. We focus on the ways in which the Fisher decision departs from precedent, proscribes new limits on the use of race in university admissions, and tightens requirements for narrow tailoring. Part II investigates the limits of the exhaustion requirement as a matter of logic, law, and policy. We focus on the necessity and exhaustion prongs of narrow tailoring with respect to the use of race in admissions. We will complicate the necessity analysis by illustrating the practical difficulties of employing race-neutral alternatives and by highlighting how this inquiry is fraught with administrative and conceptual challenges. Part III underscores the challenges presented in Part II by attempting to navigate the distinction between general race-consciousness and the use of individual racial classifications. We will explore the possibilities for university admissions committees to pursue racial and socio-economic diversity, including the opportunity-enrollment model. As a reference, we will survey integrative alternatives used in the wake of the Parents Involved decisions and suggest how colleges and universities could apply a similar set of principles and methods. We will also note the challenges facing such approaches on the scale of university admissions. We will conclude by arguing that race-conscious admissions are necessary, yet increasingly administratively challenging. The standards for narrow tailoring demand expertise beyond the skills and the resources of university admissions committees and call for more administratively cumbersome university standards. Given the extant realities of our educational system, courts should provide more leeway, not less, to universities pursuing the compelling interests of promoting student body diversity and reducing racial isolation. In the absence or relative unavailability of such resources and technical expertise, and until such deference from courts is forthcoming, universities should rely on the Supreme Court’s safe harbor by aggressively pursuing viable race-neutral alternatives with promising outcomes.

The view that we must respect cultural traditions is a welcome change from the past, when colonial powers ridiculed native customs and often sought to eradicate them. Nevertheless, it is reasonable to ask whether there is a limit to tolerance of a ritual that has been designated a “harmful traditional practice” by the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, the United Nations Population Fund, and the recently created agency, UN Women. The article “Seven Things To Know About Female Genital Surgeries in Africa,” by the Public Policy Advisory Network on Female Genital Surgeries in Africa, contends that a need exists for more balanced critical thinking and open debate about what the authors choose to call “female genital surgery.” No one can reasonably quarrel with the call for accurate information in descriptions of the methods and consequences of female genital cutting. The network's own discussion of the facts is highly questionable, however.

The construction sector is facing widespread criticism of its low efficiency and poor performance. This has led to a rethink of contemporary project management (PM). However, current critical perspectives have failed to diagnose the practical problems existing in PM, and as a consequence, no promising solutions have been proposed. In this research, a combination of critical literature review, field works, case studies, open debates and interviews revealed five fundamentally problematic aspects of contemporary PM: (1) using artificial tools and methods; (2) cannot try before build; (3) discontinuity in construction processes; (4) ineffective information and knowledge management; and (5) creeping managerialism. These problems were then scrutinized by referring them to Virtual Design and Construction (VDC) as a potential solution. Strengths of VDC are explored, and hurdles that prevent it from gaining momentum are also evaluated. It is found that the problems of contemporary PM can largely be alleviated by the use of VDC although its many hurdles are yet to be overcome. This research provides new insights into how construction companies can adopt VDC technology to improve the problematic PM practices.

Green supply chain management (GSCM) has been proposed as a potential remedy for business sustainability-related issues. This study offers key green practices that may be applied at the strategic, operational and tactical levels in order to combine conventional supply networks with sustainable supply chains. When establishing the criteria, professional opinions were taken into account in order to identify pertinent components. The analytic hierarchy process has been used to assess the relative weights and relevance of the GSCM criteria. The expert opinions from academic and industrial specialists were used to make pair-wise comparisons. Green practices have been prioritised, and a framework with 4 major factors and 16 sub-factors has been proposed for making intelligent judgements. Findings point out that top leadership commitment to sustainability-related issues, legal compliance, environmentally friendly design, green purchasing, health and safety, and regulatory compliance practices are crucial for implementing sustainability across the supply chain. It might be claimed that adopting GSCM practices can boost a company’s long-term performance while also increasing its operational eco-efficiency reaping cost and efficiency benefits. The results of the study would assist GSCM practitioners in selecting appropriate strategies in consonance with the governing rules and regulations and customers’ requirements.