Meaning of affirmative action ruling in US for society and education

By Hanna Kim

Right then, wrong now. During the African American civil rights movement in 1961, President John F. Kennedy established the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and introduced preferential policies to benefit minority races and economically disadvantaged individuals. Former President Lyndon B. Johnson further reinforced these principles in 1965, emphasizing that employment decisions should be unbiased toward race, creed, color or national origin.

Consequently, these policies extended to college admissions, offering additional points to minority racial groups. Referred to as affirmative action, these proactive measures aimed to address racial discrimination, creating a foundation for rectifying imbalances and expanding opportunities for African Americans and Hispanics in a predominantly white society. However, the issue of reverse discrimination has been raised by other minority groups, such as Asians, who feel excluded from these preferential policies, as granting advantages to some may result in disadvantages for others.

On June 29, the U.S. Supreme Court declared affirmative action policies in minority race admissions unconstitutional, violating the Fourteenth Amendment's equal protection clause. Affirmative action aimed to provide opportunities for historically disadvantaged minority races, but this decision now prohibits American universities from considering race explicitly in admissions.

Students for Fair Admissions sued Harvard University and the University of North Carolina, arguing that Asian applicants were disadvantaged by preferential policies. Chief Justice John Roberts emphasized evaluating students based on their individual experiences, rather than their racial background. This decision reflects a shift toward eliminating preferential treatment for minorities, although opinions differ on its correctness.

The controversy surrounding affirmative action persists. Justice Sonia Sotomayor, of Hispanic descent, acknowledged benefiting from these policies and argued that achieving equality requires recognizing existing inequalities. President Joe Biden strongly opposed the Supreme Court decision, emphasizing the ongoing presence of discrimination in the U.S. He intends to establish government guidelines to ensure diversity in universities, which he views as a vital national strength.

Affirmative action measures have been misunderstood as accepting unqualified students, but universities prioritize verifying qualifications such as grades before considering race. Harvard University expressed its commitment to comply with the court's decision while striving to uphold its core values that celebrate diversity and provide opportunities for previously unattainable dreams. The constitutionality of affirmative action should be viewed pragmatically, considering the country's present social circumstances rather than solely as a legal matter of constitutional interpretation.

Affirmative action is a global policy found in different forms across many countries. Approximately 10 nations have established systems to combat discrimination in higher education admissions. France's preferential admission policies consider regional and socio-economic backgrounds, granting advantages to students from specific high schools. Large-scale vocational training programs also form part of affirmative action efforts, targeting long-term unemployed individuals and marginalized groups.

In Brazil, a quota system inspired by the U.S. model aims to increase representation of Black, mixed-race and Indigenous students in universities, considering their lower income levels. Unlike the U.S., each country's policies vary, encompassing criteria such as race, ethnicity, gender, region, class and social strata, tailored to local contexts.

South Korea has implemented its own version of affirmative action across different sectors, and there is strong support from experts and the government. The country is grappling with deepening polarization and crises in various social sectors. Since 2006, proactive measures have been taken to improve employment and promote gender equality.

However, the female employment rate in public institutions and large companies remains low, with only 38.1 percent of employees women and a mere 21.8 percent of those holding managerial positions being women. To address this, the Ministry of Employment and Labor plans to publish a list of non-compliant workplaces and make it publicly available for six months.

Additionally, South Korea needs comprehensive support and considerate policies to tackle regional depopulation and achieve balanced national development. This includes region-specific industrial promotion, enhancements to educational environments for talent development, support for childbirth and improved living conditions in local areas.

North Chungcheong Province Governor Kim Young-hwan highlights the importance of affirmative action in terms of educational opportunities, cultural development and transportation infrastructure. These regional measures are closely connected to local universities with a focus on revitalizing them and providing substantial national financial support. Furthermore, South Korea already has laws in place that implement preferential policies for minority groups and socially vulnerable segments of society, such as individuals with disabilities, economically disadvantaged individuals, immigrant workers and multicultural families.

Education in South Korea incorporates affirmative action practices, such as region-based admissions policies and opportunity-balancing measures. POSTECH President Kim Moo-hwan highlights the significance of diversity in the admissions process, advocating for consideration of factors like living conditions, gender and regional distribution when selecting students.

This approach acknowledges the need to address the unequal starting point and prepares students for the diverse society they will encounter after graduation. Education policies should prioritize the principle that every student has the right to receive education, rather than being influenced by political or social factors. Admissions and education should be guided by educational logic, ensuring equal opportunities and fostering a well-rounded educational experience.

It is important to assess the areas in society where affirmative action is necessary and where it is not. In the areas requiring affirmative action, proactive measures should be strengthened. Conversely, a review process should be in place for areas where preferential treatment or policies contrary to the intended purpose are implemented. It is crucial that these policies are not influenced by political factors but maintain consistency in addressing inequality, regardless of the ruling party. Justice Sotomayor's case reminds us that recognizing inequality is an essential step towards achieving equality and societal progress.

Hanna Kim is a professor at the Department of Education at Chongshin University and majored in educational administration at Ewha Womans University. She served as a teacher, a researcher at the Korea Educational Development Institute and a research professor at Tsinghua University in China.