ST. PAUL, Minn. – The U.S. Supreme Court’s 6-3 decision to strike down race-inclusive college admission practices is unfriendly to diverse campus cultures and to diversity in general, according to a consensus of Minnesita higher-ed leaders. Even at the MinnState system, of which Winona State University and Southeast State College are part, there will be effects, said Andriel Dees, vice chancellor for equity and inclusion. This even though MinnState has no explicit policy to consider applicants one way or another on race. Even so, Dees said. the Supreme Court decision will make it harder to ensure diversity. “We know that this has an effect on all of our sister institutions throughout the state,” she said. Dees called the decision “an initial blow” to undo public policies that have strengthened the society through diversity.  “It’s really up to us to really rally around our communities of color and make sure that everyone sees themselves as a part of higher education. Dees said.

Affirmative Action profile

The term “affirmative action” was first used by President John Kennedy in 1961. Kennedy required government contractors to “take affirmative action” to ensure that job applicants be treated fairly without regard to race, creed, color or national origin. In the same spirit in 1965 President Johnson required government employers to not to consider to race, religion and national origin in hiring and employment. The concept quickly expanded into college admission practcics  to promote equal opportunities of minority groups. The idea was to compensate for past discrimination, persecution or exploitation by the dominant classes in the American culture and to address discrimination. White supremacists have cringed at affirmative action. They claim it gave privilege to minority groups to the disadvantage of majority groups.

Minnesota reactions

A sampler:

> Tim Walz, governor: “Diversity in our schools and businesses reflects a strong and diverse state. One thing is very clear: Minnesota is strong — and we’ll continue working to ensure that everyone has a fair shot to succeed here.”

> Tina Smith, Democrat from Minnesota in U.S. Senate: “This radical ruling undermines critical efforts o redress historic mistreatment of people of color and will do real harm to students.” She blamed right-wing organizations “that have captured this Court.”

> Betty McCollum, Democrat, MN-3, in the U.S. House: “This decision rolls bqck the progress we’ve made and the judicial precedent that’s been established to promote inclusion and equity in higher education – undermining opportunity to make the higher-system process to work for everyone.”

> Rachel Croson, University of Minnesota provost: UM will continue to ensure that its admission processes comply with the new state of the law and also live out the university’s values of inclusion and access. This has been brought to you by the right-organizations that have captured the Court.”

> Suzanne Rivera, Macalester College president: “The university remains dedicated to building and retaining a diverse student body and increasing access to higher education and will find ways to ensure its campus isn’t missing out on important voices.

Counterviews

> Brad Finstad, Republican, MN-1, in the U.S. House: “Today’s Supreme Court decision asserts that no American should be discriminated against because of the color of their skin. College admissions should never be based on race, rather it should be based on a student’s merits. It is unacceptable to deprive qualified students of educational opportunities because they don’t fit a certain demographic.”

> Tom Emmer, Republican, MN-6, in U.S. House Republican whip: College admissions should be based on merit and character, not rave. “I’m glad to see the Supreme Court take this critical stand for fairness and equal opportunity.”