1
00:00:03,880 --> 00:00:07,000
Speaker 1: From Bloomberg News and I Heart Radio. It's the Big Take.

2
00:00:07,360 --> 00:00:11,160
Speaker 1: I'm West Gasova. Each weekday we dig into one important

3
00:00:11,240 --> 00:00:14,280
Speaker 1: story and today, what will happen if the U. S.

4
00:00:14,280 --> 00:00:19,040
Speaker 1: Supreme Court puts an end to affirmative action in college admissions.

5
00:00:25,000 --> 00:00:29,800
Speaker 1: For decades, colleges and universities across the US have promoted

6
00:00:29,840 --> 00:00:34,239
Speaker 1: the value of having a diverse student body on campus.

7
00:00:35,200 --> 00:00:37,920
Speaker 1: One way they've worked towards this the list of things

8
00:00:37,920 --> 00:00:41,840
Speaker 1: the admissions officers consider when they pick up an application,

9
00:00:42,080 --> 00:00:46,000
Speaker 1: like test scorers, special skills, sports, even where a student

10
00:00:46,040 --> 00:00:50,559
Speaker 1: grew up, includes the applicants race or ethnicity. The result

11
00:00:51,360 --> 00:00:54,480
Speaker 1: more non white students get into the nation's top schools.

12
00:00:55,280 --> 00:00:57,720
Speaker 1: But this term, the U. S. Supreme Court will decide

13
00:00:57,760 --> 00:01:01,319
Speaker 1: on two challenges to this way doing things, And if

14
00:01:01,360 --> 00:01:05,040
Speaker 1: the court's new conservative majority strikes down affirmative action in

15
00:01:05,120 --> 00:01:09,960
Speaker 1: college admissions, it will have enormous repercussions for who gets

16
00:01:10,000 --> 00:01:15,039
Speaker 1: into the nation's top schools and who doesn't. To explain

17
00:01:15,120 --> 00:01:21,479
Speaker 1: all this, Bloomberg senior reporter Greg Store joins me. Now, Greg,

18
00:01:21,480 --> 00:01:24,680
Speaker 1: you've been covering with the Supreme Court for a long time. Yeah,

19
00:01:24,720 --> 00:01:28,480
Speaker 1: something like since n whatever that is, So you have

20
00:01:28,640 --> 00:01:32,360
Speaker 1: seen the Supreme Court take up affirmative action, and before

21
00:01:32,480 --> 00:01:35,240
Speaker 1: can you just kind of spell out for us exactly

22
00:01:35,319 --> 00:01:38,080
Speaker 1: what are the two cases that the Court is going

23
00:01:38,120 --> 00:01:41,400
Speaker 1: to hear now and why the results will have such

24
00:01:41,400 --> 00:01:44,040
Speaker 1: a huge effect. Let me start in the late nineteen

25
00:01:44,120 --> 00:01:46,160
Speaker 1: seventies when the Supreme Court said for the first time

26
00:01:46,200 --> 00:01:49,760
Speaker 1: that universities could consider race as a means of ensuring

27
00:01:49,800 --> 00:01:53,800
Speaker 1: diversity in their classes. The Supreme Court reaffirmed that precedent

28
00:01:54,080 --> 00:01:57,040
Speaker 1: in two thousand three, and now these two cases before

29
00:01:57,040 --> 00:01:59,920
Speaker 1: the Court, involving Harvard and the University of North Carolina,

30
00:02:00,280 --> 00:02:04,760
Speaker 1: potentially could overturn those precedents and say universities cannot consider

31
00:02:04,920 --> 00:02:07,600
Speaker 1: race as an admissions factor. How do we get to

32
00:02:07,680 --> 00:02:12,799
Speaker 1: the current system of using diversity and admissions. Yeah, that's

33
00:02:12,800 --> 00:02:15,600
Speaker 1: a really good question. The year and that was when

34
00:02:15,600 --> 00:02:19,120
Speaker 1: the Supreme Court decided this case called Baki that had

35
00:02:19,160 --> 00:02:22,120
Speaker 1: to do with the University of California and the medical school.

36
00:02:22,120 --> 00:02:26,680
Speaker 1: There the importance of including young men and women at

37
00:02:26,720 --> 00:02:31,880
Speaker 1: both undergraduate colleges and the medical schools so that they

38
00:02:32,120 --> 00:02:36,160
Speaker 1: other younger boys and girls. May I see, Yes, it

39
00:02:36,360 --> 00:02:42,200
Speaker 1: is possible for a black to go to University of

40
00:02:42,240 --> 00:02:47,079
Speaker 1: Minnesota or to go to Harvard or Yale. That was

41
00:02:47,120 --> 00:02:51,680
Speaker 1: Attorney Archibald Cox, who represented the University of California, which

42
00:02:51,919 --> 00:02:56,320
Speaker 1: was arguing in favor of affirmative action, and Alan Back,

43
00:02:56,760 --> 00:02:59,000
Speaker 1: who brought the case, was a thirty five year old

44
00:02:59,000 --> 00:03:02,600
Speaker 1: white man who would be rejected twice from the medical school,

45
00:03:02,919 --> 00:03:08,080
Speaker 1: and you see Davis. In that case. It was a

46
00:03:08,120 --> 00:03:12,240
Speaker 1: splintered court, and a majority of the court rejected the

47
00:03:12,280 --> 00:03:16,239
Speaker 1: idea that schools could consider race as a means of

48
00:03:16,280 --> 00:03:22,399
Speaker 1: addressing widespread societal discrimination, the vestiges of slavery and Jim

49
00:03:22,440 --> 00:03:24,720
Speaker 1: Crow and all that. The Justice who was in the

50
00:03:24,760 --> 00:03:27,920
Speaker 1: middle of this case, Louis Powell, said, Ah, but what

51
00:03:28,000 --> 00:03:31,799
Speaker 1: they can do is, because universities have a First Amendment

52
00:03:31,840 --> 00:03:38,040
Speaker 1: interest in having a rich, diverse academic environment, they can

53
00:03:38,160 --> 00:03:42,920
Speaker 1: consider race for this purpose of diversity. Here's Archibald Cox again.

54
00:03:43,720 --> 00:03:47,120
Speaker 1: This is essential if we are ever going to give

55
00:03:47,960 --> 00:03:52,320
Speaker 1: true equality in a factual sense to people, because the

56
00:03:52,360 --> 00:03:57,680
Speaker 1: existence or non existence of opportunities, surely we all know

57
00:03:58,960 --> 00:04:04,240
Speaker 1: shaped people's aspirations when they're very young. So that ended

58
00:04:04,280 --> 00:04:07,560
Speaker 1: up being the rationale that for the past almost fifty

59
00:04:07,640 --> 00:04:11,360
Speaker 1: years universities have used and pointed to. So when it

60
00:04:11,400 --> 00:04:15,400
Speaker 1: comes to schools, what is affirmative action? How does it

61
00:04:15,440 --> 00:04:21,960
Speaker 1: actually work? So most selective universities, not as many as

62
00:04:22,000 --> 00:04:25,400
Speaker 1: there used to be, but most selected universities say, we

63
00:04:25,440 --> 00:04:28,640
Speaker 1: want to ensure a certain amount of racial diversity, but

64
00:04:28,680 --> 00:04:32,080
Speaker 1: also other types of diversity on campus, and in order

65
00:04:32,120 --> 00:04:34,839
Speaker 1: to get there, with some applicants, we are going to

66
00:04:35,400 --> 00:04:38,160
Speaker 1: consider their race as one of many factors in the

67
00:04:38,200 --> 00:04:42,720
Speaker 1: admissions process. So both Harvard and North Carolina do what

68
00:04:42,760 --> 00:04:47,160
Speaker 1: they call holistic review, and in many cases, one thing

69
00:04:47,240 --> 00:04:51,760
Speaker 1: they consider is this person is from an underrepresented minority

70
00:04:51,800 --> 00:04:54,839
Speaker 1: group and that will add something to our class. You

71
00:04:54,880 --> 00:04:58,800
Speaker 1: mentioned holistic review exactly what is a holistic review of

72
00:04:58,839 --> 00:05:03,919
Speaker 1: a student's application. Holistic review is the notion that the

73
00:05:04,040 --> 00:05:08,080
Speaker 1: university looks at the entire file. It doesn't assign points

74
00:05:08,640 --> 00:05:11,880
Speaker 1: because you had a three point seven g p A

75
00:05:12,680 --> 00:05:16,800
Speaker 1: or because you come from a rural area. It's more

76
00:05:16,839 --> 00:05:19,760
Speaker 1: of a kind of we're going to consider all those things,

77
00:05:19,760 --> 00:05:22,000
Speaker 1: but we're not going to have rigid criteria for how

78
00:05:22,080 --> 00:05:24,799
Speaker 1: we determine whether or not you're admitted. And the Supreme

79
00:05:24,800 --> 00:05:28,080
Speaker 1: Court made that distinction back in two thousand and three. Yeah,

80
00:05:28,080 --> 00:05:30,400
Speaker 1: and that was in Gruder versus Bolinger. We've got a

81
00:05:30,400 --> 00:05:34,360
Speaker 1: clip here of the arguments between Justice Sandra Day O'Connor

82
00:05:34,800 --> 00:05:39,680
Speaker 1: and Attorney Kirk Colbo, who represented Barbara Gruder. She was

83
00:05:39,960 --> 00:05:42,359
Speaker 1: a white woman who was rejected by the University of

84
00:05:42,400 --> 00:05:47,880
Speaker 1: Michigan Law School. Race is impermissible because of the Constitutional

85
00:05:47,920 --> 00:05:51,160
Speaker 1: command of equality. The university is certainly free to make

86
00:05:51,279 --> 00:05:54,200
Speaker 1: many different kinds of choices in selecting students, and to

87
00:05:54,200 --> 00:05:58,520
Speaker 1: look for all kinds of different diversity, experiential diversity, perspective diversity,

88
00:05:59,279 --> 00:06:02,680
Speaker 1: without regard to race. But race, because your honor of

89
00:06:02,720 --> 00:06:06,279
Speaker 1: the constitutional command of equality must be beyond the bounds.

90
00:06:06,640 --> 00:06:09,880
Speaker 1: You say, that's not it can't be a factor at all.

91
00:06:10,520 --> 00:06:13,120
Speaker 1: Is that it is that your position that it cannot

92
00:06:13,160 --> 00:06:16,760
Speaker 1: be one of many factors? Are you your honor? Is it?

93
00:06:16,880 --> 00:06:20,240
Speaker 1: Race itself should not be a factor. If you have

94
00:06:20,320 --> 00:06:23,880
Speaker 1: holistic review where you consider race as just one quality

95
00:06:23,920 --> 00:06:27,440
Speaker 1: in a person's application, that's okay. What you can't do,

96
00:06:27,800 --> 00:06:32,360
Speaker 1: the court said, is automatically give every black applicant ten

97
00:06:32,440 --> 00:06:36,120
Speaker 1: points just because they're black. And so it's not strictly

98
00:06:36,200 --> 00:06:39,080
Speaker 1: that there are a certain number of slots set aside

99
00:06:39,120 --> 00:06:44,080
Speaker 1: in each class for people in different underrepresented minority groups.

100
00:06:44,240 --> 00:06:48,760
Speaker 1: It's part of a broader consideration to try to get

101
00:06:48,800 --> 00:06:52,479
Speaker 1: a wider mixture of people with different perspectives in life experience. Right,

102
00:06:52,640 --> 00:06:55,560
Speaker 1: So we're not talking about a quota. That's what a

103
00:06:55,560 --> 00:06:57,360
Speaker 1: lot of people think of a affirmative action is a

104
00:06:57,480 --> 00:07:00,919
Speaker 1: quota system. Yeah, and the Supreme Court has said you

105
00:07:01,000 --> 00:07:04,200
Speaker 1: cannot do that. Now, what exactly a quota is? You know,

106
00:07:04,400 --> 00:07:06,520
Speaker 1: we could have a debate over that. Back in two

107
00:07:06,560 --> 00:07:09,880
Speaker 1: thousand three, University of Michigan said, what we're trying to

108
00:07:09,920 --> 00:07:12,080
Speaker 1: achieve here in the Supreme Court said it was okay,

109
00:07:12,240 --> 00:07:14,560
Speaker 1: is what we call a critical mass. It's not like

110
00:07:14,600 --> 00:07:17,120
Speaker 1: a Harden and Fast number. But we want to make

111
00:07:17,160 --> 00:07:21,520
Speaker 1: sure we have enough students of minority groups that they

112
00:07:21,760 --> 00:07:25,040
Speaker 1: can feel like individuals and not representatives of their race.

113
00:07:25,120 --> 00:07:28,200
Speaker 1: And everybody can see that members of one race don't

114
00:07:28,280 --> 00:07:31,880
Speaker 1: all think alike. And so now what we have are

115
00:07:31,920 --> 00:07:36,640
Speaker 1: two cases, one involving Harvard University, one the University of

116
00:07:36,680 --> 00:07:39,320
Speaker 1: North Carolina. And they're being brought by this group called

117
00:07:39,440 --> 00:07:43,760
Speaker 1: Students for Fair Admissions. Exactly what are they challenging here

118
00:07:43,800 --> 00:07:46,560
Speaker 1: and and what's this group? So it's a group that

119
00:07:46,720 --> 00:07:50,400
Speaker 1: is basically run by one guy. His name is Edward Blum.

120
00:07:50,400 --> 00:07:55,960
Speaker 1: He's a longtime opponent of racial preferences. They represent students.

121
00:07:56,440 --> 00:07:59,400
Speaker 1: There are in these cases no particular students that are

122
00:07:59,480 --> 00:08:03,840
Speaker 1: challenging the admissions practices, but this group says we're advocating

123
00:08:03,880 --> 00:08:06,320
Speaker 1: on behalf of students who feel like they have been

124
00:08:06,320 --> 00:08:10,480
Speaker 1: discriminated against. In the case of Harvard, they say students

125
00:08:10,520 --> 00:08:12,720
Speaker 1: who are paying the price for the Firm of Action

126
00:08:12,760 --> 00:08:16,400
Speaker 1: program at Harvard tend to be Asian American students who

127
00:08:16,440 --> 00:08:19,440
Speaker 1: are getting kind of docked in the admissions process, and

128
00:08:19,640 --> 00:08:23,920
Speaker 1: students for Fair Representation argueser's basically a ceiling on the

129
00:08:24,000 --> 00:08:27,040
Speaker 1: number of Asian American students that Harvard will admit. So

130
00:08:27,080 --> 00:08:29,440
Speaker 1: that's Harvard. The u n C case University of North

131
00:08:29,440 --> 00:08:33,480
Speaker 1: Carolina is a little bit different. So the u n

132
00:08:33,559 --> 00:08:36,960
Speaker 1: C admissions program is somewhat similar in that they use

133
00:08:37,080 --> 00:08:39,920
Speaker 1: holistic review. They don't, you know, assign points for certain

134
00:08:40,320 --> 00:08:44,520
Speaker 1: test scorers or other qualities. That case tends to focus

135
00:08:44,640 --> 00:08:48,360
Speaker 1: more on whether u n C looked at so called

136
00:08:48,440 --> 00:08:53,320
Speaker 1: race neutral alternatives. Well enough, there's some Supreme Court case

137
00:08:53,400 --> 00:08:56,600
Speaker 1: law that says schools have to look at that first

138
00:08:56,640 --> 00:08:58,600
Speaker 1: and see if it's at least feasible, and the argument

139
00:08:58,679 --> 00:09:01,880
Speaker 1: is they didn't do that. So the cases are being

140
00:09:01,920 --> 00:09:06,439
Speaker 1: considered separately instead of together, but on the same day.

141
00:09:06,559 --> 00:09:10,320
Speaker 1: They are on the same day. There's two primary differences

142
00:09:10,320 --> 00:09:12,040
Speaker 1: between the two cases, in addition to the fact that

143
00:09:12,040 --> 00:09:16,240
Speaker 1: they're just two different admissions processes. One is that Justice

144
00:09:16,280 --> 00:09:19,160
Speaker 1: Katangi Brown Jackson, because she was a member of the

145
00:09:19,200 --> 00:09:21,880
Speaker 1: Harvard Board of Overseers, has recused from that case. So

146
00:09:21,920 --> 00:09:23,439
Speaker 1: she's not going to take part in the Harvard case.

147
00:09:23,480 --> 00:09:26,000
Speaker 1: She's only going to take part in the North Carolina case.

148
00:09:26,720 --> 00:09:30,520
Speaker 1: The other difference is that because North Carolina is a

149
00:09:30,559 --> 00:09:35,520
Speaker 1: state run school, the constitutions Equal Protection Clause applies to it.

150
00:09:35,960 --> 00:09:38,439
Speaker 1: The equal Protection Clause doesn't apply to Harvard because it's

151
00:09:38,440 --> 00:09:43,840
Speaker 1: a private entity. The Harvard case is not about the Constitution.

152
00:09:44,040 --> 00:09:46,679
Speaker 1: It is about the Civil Rights Act of nineteen sixty four,

153
00:09:46,679 --> 00:09:49,400
Speaker 1: and in particular Title six of that law. And that

154
00:09:49,480 --> 00:09:53,400
Speaker 1: law basically says, if you receive federal funding, which almost

155
00:09:53,400 --> 00:09:57,440
Speaker 1: all universities do, you cannot discriminate on the basis of

156
00:09:57,440 --> 00:10:00,559
Speaker 1: a lot of things, including race. The Supreme Court has

157
00:10:00,600 --> 00:10:03,319
Speaker 1: said that the standard under that law is basically the

158
00:10:03,360 --> 00:10:05,440
Speaker 1: same as the equal Protection clause, but they are at

159
00:10:05,520 --> 00:10:09,920
Speaker 1: least different kind of legal arguments, So that could potentially

160
00:10:10,320 --> 00:10:15,960
Speaker 1: cause some different analyzes in the two cases. So what

161
00:10:16,000 --> 00:10:20,640
Speaker 1: are you listening for in these arguments? So going into

162
00:10:20,679 --> 00:10:23,080
Speaker 1: this argument, there is an awful lot of reason to

163
00:10:23,160 --> 00:10:27,800
Speaker 1: think that the Court's conservative majority is likely to overturn

164
00:10:27,840 --> 00:10:31,280
Speaker 1: at least the two thousand three Greater decision, which reaffirmed

165
00:10:31,280 --> 00:10:34,360
Speaker 1: that universities could use race as an admissions factor. And

166
00:10:34,520 --> 00:10:36,800
Speaker 1: this was the case. The court heard two cases that year.

167
00:10:36,880 --> 00:10:40,640
Speaker 1: One involved the undergraduate program at the University of Michigan,

168
00:10:40,679 --> 00:10:43,439
Speaker 1: one involved the law school, and the court sort of

169
00:10:43,480 --> 00:10:46,520
Speaker 1: split the difference. It upheld the law school program, and

170
00:10:46,559 --> 00:10:48,439
Speaker 1: that ended up being the blueprint that a lot of

171
00:10:48,640 --> 00:10:52,040
Speaker 1: universities around the country could use to continue trying to

172
00:10:52,559 --> 00:10:56,400
Speaker 1: diversify their campuses. So I'll be listening to anything that

173
00:10:56,480 --> 00:11:00,080
Speaker 1: kind of cuts against the sense going in that the

174
00:11:00,160 --> 00:11:03,880
Speaker 1: Court is inclined to over rule Grouder and abolish the

175
00:11:04,000 --> 00:11:07,280
Speaker 1: use of race in admissions. Certainly, we're going to be

176
00:11:07,320 --> 00:11:11,360
Speaker 1: listening for what the newest Justice, Cantangi Brown Jackson, has

177
00:11:11,400 --> 00:11:13,680
Speaker 1: to say. She sort of laid down a marker in

178
00:11:13,720 --> 00:11:17,920
Speaker 1: an earlier case involving voting rights, where she argued that

179
00:11:18,240 --> 00:11:21,600
Speaker 1: the Constitution allows the government to consider race for a

180
00:11:21,600 --> 00:11:23,960
Speaker 1: lot of purposes. The Equal Protection Clause was put in

181
00:11:24,000 --> 00:11:26,760
Speaker 1: place after the Civil War with an idea that the

182
00:11:26,760 --> 00:11:29,640
Speaker 1: government could do things that would take race into account.

183
00:11:30,200 --> 00:11:32,640
Speaker 1: And I'm going to be listening for Chief Justice John Roberts,

184
00:11:32,640 --> 00:11:35,280
Speaker 1: because while we think of John Roberts, and he has

185
00:11:35,280 --> 00:11:38,000
Speaker 1: been in other cases like the abortion case last term,

186
00:11:38,040 --> 00:11:40,000
Speaker 1: the justice who doesn't want to go as far as

187
00:11:40,040 --> 00:11:43,360
Speaker 1: some of his more conservative colleagues in the context of race,

188
00:11:43,520 --> 00:11:47,079
Speaker 1: he's been very outspoken. He in a case shortly after

189
00:11:47,160 --> 00:11:50,360
Speaker 1: he became Chief Justice, famously said that the way to

190
00:11:50,440 --> 00:11:53,320
Speaker 1: stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop

191
00:11:53,360 --> 00:11:56,160
Speaker 1: discriminating on the basis of race. He would like to

192
00:11:56,160 --> 00:11:58,720
Speaker 1: see a color blind constitution, at least based on his

193
00:11:58,760 --> 00:12:01,360
Speaker 1: past comments. So be listening to see if there's any

194
00:12:01,440 --> 00:12:04,240
Speaker 1: change with anybody on those things they've said in the past.

195
00:12:05,840 --> 00:12:08,960
Speaker 1: When we come back. My conversation with Greg Store continues.

196
00:12:20,120 --> 00:12:25,560
Speaker 1: If the Court does overturn affirmative action in college admissions,

197
00:12:26,360 --> 00:12:29,800
Speaker 1: will that have any sort of knock on effect beyond

198
00:12:30,000 --> 00:12:34,719
Speaker 1: universities when it comes to job hiring the workplace or

199
00:12:35,200 --> 00:12:39,400
Speaker 1: or elsewhere it might well and one thing to pay

200
00:12:39,400 --> 00:12:42,160
Speaker 1: attention to. Let me just start with the workplace. Uh,

201
00:12:42,200 --> 00:12:45,160
Speaker 1: this is both a constitutional case and a case under

202
00:12:45,600 --> 00:12:49,400
Speaker 1: the Civil Rights Act. If the Court says we're looking

203
00:12:49,400 --> 00:12:52,480
Speaker 1: at the Civil Rights Act to say you cannot consider

204
00:12:52,600 --> 00:12:55,360
Speaker 1: race as a factor, well, that Civil Rights Act, a

205
00:12:55,400 --> 00:12:59,079
Speaker 1: different provision of it also applies to private companies. And

206
00:12:59,520 --> 00:13:02,440
Speaker 1: so some people are wondering is the next step after

207
00:13:02,480 --> 00:13:04,480
Speaker 1: the court. If the Court says you can't consider race

208
00:13:04,520 --> 00:13:07,520
Speaker 1: as an admissions factor, will the court then say, okay,

209
00:13:07,600 --> 00:13:10,840
Speaker 1: let's take another look at whether companies can consider race

210
00:13:11,080 --> 00:13:14,800
Speaker 1: as a factor in hiring another job related activities. If

211
00:13:14,840 --> 00:13:18,240
Speaker 1: they make it a constitutional case, then it is easier

212
00:13:18,280 --> 00:13:22,040
Speaker 1: to see that principle applying to other areas of law.

213
00:13:22,160 --> 00:13:26,319
Speaker 1: So for example, voting and the extent to which a

214
00:13:26,440 --> 00:13:30,800
Speaker 1: state may consider race as part of redistricting. That's the

215
00:13:30,880 --> 00:13:32,720
Speaker 1: kind of thing that could be implicated if the Court

216
00:13:32,800 --> 00:13:36,839
Speaker 1: issues a constitutional ruling in this case. The Supreme Court

217
00:13:36,880 --> 00:13:41,080
Speaker 1: will hear the cases, but there won't be a ruling

218
00:13:41,320 --> 00:13:44,160
Speaker 1: until later this year, probably next year, where I think

219
00:13:44,160 --> 00:13:46,520
Speaker 1: we're probably looking at one of those cases that where

220
00:13:46,520 --> 00:13:48,240
Speaker 1: the decision comes out at the end of the court's

221
00:13:48,320 --> 00:13:50,800
Speaker 1: term in in late June. Is there a chance, because

222
00:13:50,800 --> 00:13:53,800
Speaker 1: they're deciding these separately, that you have different outcomes in

223
00:13:53,840 --> 00:13:59,200
Speaker 1: each case. It's certainly theoretically possible, given the reality of

224
00:13:59,240 --> 00:14:02,920
Speaker 1: this court. At a practical matter, it's probably unlikely, But

225
00:14:03,040 --> 00:14:06,280
Speaker 1: it could be that the arguments end up being very

226
00:14:06,360 --> 00:14:09,680
Speaker 1: different because one is focused on what the Equal Protection

227
00:14:09,679 --> 00:14:13,120
Speaker 1: Clause means, what it meant when it was ratified after

228
00:14:13,160 --> 00:14:15,959
Speaker 1: the Civil War, and the other one drills down into

229
00:14:16,040 --> 00:14:19,080
Speaker 1: the words of the Civil Rights Act and what those mean.

230
00:14:19,720 --> 00:14:22,080
Speaker 1: And you're expecting, if you're going to look into your

231
00:14:22,400 --> 00:14:25,240
Speaker 1: crystal ball without holding you to your answer, what do

232
00:14:25,280 --> 00:14:28,280
Speaker 1: you think the outcome will be. It's really hard to

233
00:14:28,320 --> 00:14:31,880
Speaker 1: see how the Supreme Court leaves intact the ability of

234
00:14:31,960 --> 00:14:35,240
Speaker 1: universities to consider race in the admissions process. Given the

235
00:14:35,280 --> 00:14:38,920
Speaker 1: sixth three conservative majority, it's a really heavy lift to think,

236
00:14:38,960 --> 00:14:41,480
Speaker 1: even if the three liberal justices vote the way we

237
00:14:41,520 --> 00:14:44,360
Speaker 1: think they probably will, to say universities can keep doing this.

238
00:14:44,840 --> 00:14:46,520
Speaker 1: To see how they're going to get two more votes

239
00:14:46,640 --> 00:14:49,240
Speaker 1: to do that without John Roberts being one of them,

240
00:14:49,520 --> 00:14:52,520
Speaker 1: that's a pretty tall order. Greg Star, thanks for being here,

241
00:14:52,640 --> 00:14:58,200
Speaker 1: sure thing. If it's Greg says, the Supreme Court does

242
00:14:58,200 --> 00:15:02,920
Speaker 1: abolish affirmative action in higher education, what are schools gonna do?

243
00:15:03,800 --> 00:15:07,120
Speaker 1: Kelsey Butler is a reporter on Bloomberg's Equality team, and

244
00:15:07,280 --> 00:15:10,480
Speaker 1: she's been talking to admissions officers all over the place

245
00:15:10,520 --> 00:15:14,640
Speaker 1: to find out. So we're just talking to Greg Store,

246
00:15:14,880 --> 00:15:18,480
Speaker 1: who says, pretty much, Supreme Court is going to overturn

247
00:15:18,560 --> 00:15:24,520
Speaker 1: affirmative action in college admissions. You and Patricia Hurtado teamed

248
00:15:24,560 --> 00:15:27,000
Speaker 1: up to try to find out what will that mean,

249
00:15:27,040 --> 00:15:29,720
Speaker 1: What is the future of college admissions look like? How

250
00:15:29,720 --> 00:15:32,840
Speaker 1: do you go about measuring that? So what we did

251
00:15:32,960 --> 00:15:36,240
Speaker 1: was we looked at the places where affirmative action has

252
00:15:36,240 --> 00:15:40,560
Speaker 1: already gone away. There are ten states where affirmative action

253
00:15:40,640 --> 00:15:44,120
Speaker 1: has disappeared in the admissions process, and we looked at

254
00:15:44,160 --> 00:15:47,720
Speaker 1: the data to kind of show what has happened, what

255
00:15:47,920 --> 00:15:51,360
Speaker 1: tactics those schools have employed, if they've gone far enough,

256
00:15:51,520 --> 00:15:55,360
Speaker 1: if they haven't, what's been most successful and what has it.

257
00:15:57,600 --> 00:16:00,000
Speaker 1: So let me just clarify here is that under the

258
00:16:00,080 --> 00:16:04,760
Speaker 1: law now, public schools and states can decide not to

259
00:16:05,040 --> 00:16:10,440
Speaker 1: allow affirmative action in admissions, and if they change this

260
00:16:10,480 --> 00:16:13,600
Speaker 1: by some report means no states will be allowed to

261
00:16:13,680 --> 00:16:16,640
Speaker 1: use it, exactly. And in a lot of those states,

262
00:16:16,720 --> 00:16:20,040
Speaker 1: voters have actually gone to the polls and basically said

263
00:16:20,040 --> 00:16:23,400
Speaker 1: that they don't want affirmative action in the admissions process.

264
00:16:23,440 --> 00:16:26,400
Speaker 1: And you know, that's something that has happened in California,

265
00:16:26,480 --> 00:16:29,680
Speaker 1: in Michigan, and you know, we've seen the ramifications of

266
00:16:29,720 --> 00:16:34,440
Speaker 1: that and what has happened to college admissions in those

267
00:16:34,480 --> 00:16:38,960
Speaker 1: states in the aftermath of affirmative action no longer being

268
00:16:39,080 --> 00:16:43,680
Speaker 1: allowed in admissions. Basically, none of the tactics, aside from

269
00:16:43,840 --> 00:16:47,480
Speaker 1: considering race and admissions, goes far enough and pretty much

270
00:16:47,520 --> 00:16:52,880
Speaker 1: every scenario, the most underrepresented groups end up being less

271
00:16:52,920 --> 00:16:58,120
Speaker 1: likely to get admittance into the most elite institutions pretty much.

272
00:16:58,320 --> 00:17:02,320
Speaker 1: And what are the most under represent any grips. This

273
00:17:02,480 --> 00:17:06,240
Speaker 1: had a huge impact on African Americans, on black students,

274
00:17:06,280 --> 00:17:09,080
Speaker 1: and we also saw a huge impact on Native American

275
00:17:09,160 --> 00:17:12,800
Speaker 1: and Indigenous students. And we also saw a drop off

276
00:17:12,840 --> 00:17:16,720
Speaker 1: in many cases in Latino enrollment. And that's as the

277
00:17:16,920 --> 00:17:19,159
Speaker 1: nation has become more and more diverse, and you know,

278
00:17:19,200 --> 00:17:23,200
Speaker 1: as Latino population has grown, the trend line hasn't really

279
00:17:23,200 --> 00:17:27,480
Speaker 1: been the same in those most selective schools Selective schools

280
00:17:27,600 --> 00:17:30,719
Speaker 1: essentially are those schools that are hard to get into,

281
00:17:31,040 --> 00:17:34,080
Speaker 1: that there's a chance you might not get into. It's

282
00:17:34,119 --> 00:17:37,960
Speaker 1: not a school that necessarily just accepts everyone with open arms.

283
00:17:38,000 --> 00:17:41,520
Speaker 1: So their desirable schools and also schools where people who

284
00:17:41,600 --> 00:17:44,960
Speaker 1: graduate tend to be attractive to employers and tend to

285
00:17:44,960 --> 00:17:47,720
Speaker 1: do pretty well in part because they went to a

286
00:17:47,760 --> 00:17:50,560
Speaker 1: school that has a really good reputation. It's not just

287
00:17:50,680 --> 00:17:54,280
Speaker 1: about going to college. It's also about the fact that

288
00:17:54,520 --> 00:17:57,840
Speaker 1: the most elite institutions have a lot to do with

289
00:17:57,920 --> 00:18:02,520
Speaker 1: who becomes powerful in our nation's society. If you go

290
00:18:02,640 --> 00:18:05,600
Speaker 1: to a school with a really recognizable brand name, you're

291
00:18:05,640 --> 00:18:08,080
Speaker 1: going to be much more likely to be able to

292
00:18:08,280 --> 00:18:10,480
Speaker 1: rise the ranks in your career, rise the ranks and

293
00:18:10,600 --> 00:18:15,240
Speaker 1: government become a kind of powerful player in shaping our

294
00:18:15,280 --> 00:18:20,719
Speaker 1: society for the future. College, of course, has always been

295
00:18:20,720 --> 00:18:25,919
Speaker 1: a path to upward mobility, and it also affects how

296
00:18:26,000 --> 00:18:28,520
Speaker 1: much money you make, what sort of income you have,

297
00:18:28,600 --> 00:18:31,200
Speaker 1: in what you're able then to do for your children

298
00:18:31,560 --> 00:18:34,960
Speaker 1: years later. Certainly, and I thought this was such a

299
00:18:35,119 --> 00:18:39,600
Speaker 1: great and fascinating example out of California. The University of

300
00:18:39,640 --> 00:18:43,920
Speaker 1: California system has had to contend with this since affirmative

301
00:18:43,920 --> 00:18:47,680
Speaker 1: action was banned in the nineties, there was a huge

302
00:18:47,720 --> 00:18:50,960
Speaker 1: study done on not only how many people got in

303
00:18:51,000 --> 00:18:53,359
Speaker 1: the door and there was a steep drop off in

304
00:18:53,600 --> 00:18:57,080
Speaker 1: black and Latino students getting into the most selective schools,

305
00:18:57,119 --> 00:19:00,560
Speaker 1: but also what happened after. And this was an analysis

306
00:19:00,560 --> 00:19:04,240
Speaker 1: of over ten thousand students. Black and Latino students were

307
00:19:04,320 --> 00:19:07,280
Speaker 1: less likely to earn over a hundred thousand dollars a year,

308
00:19:07,760 --> 00:19:10,280
Speaker 1: and they were also less likely to kind of sign

309
00:19:10,320 --> 00:19:12,800
Speaker 1: up for majors that would then set them up to

310
00:19:12,840 --> 00:19:16,639
Speaker 1: be higher earners in the future. So again not just

311
00:19:16,760 --> 00:19:20,400
Speaker 1: about getting in the door as a freshman, but also

312
00:19:20,480 --> 00:19:24,040
Speaker 1: about what your earning potential, what you're kind of bank

313
00:19:24,040 --> 00:19:26,800
Speaker 1: account is going to look like in the future. Kelsey

314
00:19:26,840 --> 00:19:29,000
Speaker 1: walk us through what it looks like in a school

315
00:19:29,080 --> 00:19:33,440
Speaker 1: that does allow racial preferences in building a student body.

316
00:19:33,800 --> 00:19:36,199
Speaker 1: You know, what has come up in my reporting and

317
00:19:36,240 --> 00:19:40,960
Speaker 1: talking to admissions officers is that race informs so much

318
00:19:41,000 --> 00:19:44,240
Speaker 1: of people's identity and who they are. When you're a

319
00:19:44,280 --> 00:19:47,640
Speaker 1: high school student. It might determine where you live, what

320
00:19:47,680 --> 00:19:50,560
Speaker 1: opportunities you've had up to that point. It's not the

321
00:19:50,640 --> 00:19:54,600
Speaker 1: only deciding factor it's just one of them. And you know,

322
00:19:54,640 --> 00:19:58,040
Speaker 1: I do really want to emphasize that race, though it's

323
00:19:58,080 --> 00:20:01,720
Speaker 1: part of the consideration, is not the only thing. And

324
00:20:02,480 --> 00:20:04,960
Speaker 1: none of the students that are getting admitted that our

325
00:20:05,200 --> 00:20:10,679
Speaker 1: minority students to these elite institutions are underqualified. They're all

326
00:20:10,720 --> 00:20:14,240
Speaker 1: getting in the door because they deserve to be there. Now,

327
00:20:14,280 --> 00:20:18,959
Speaker 1: schools that do this, is it effective? Certainly? And you know,

328
00:20:19,160 --> 00:20:21,520
Speaker 1: the way that we really see this is um what

329
00:20:21,640 --> 00:20:24,280
Speaker 1: happens when it goes away. I think a really good

330
00:20:24,320 --> 00:20:27,239
Speaker 1: example of that is the University of Michigan. They've been

331
00:20:27,280 --> 00:20:31,120
Speaker 1: extremely vocal about kind of what happened at their institution

332
00:20:31,320 --> 00:20:34,840
Speaker 1: when affirmative action went away in two thousand and six,

333
00:20:34,960 --> 00:20:38,560
Speaker 1: the last year before race based admissions went into effect,

334
00:20:40,280 --> 00:20:45,240
Speaker 1: of the schools undergrads were minorities and UM then affirmative

335
00:20:45,280 --> 00:20:51,200
Speaker 1: action was banned. It took until one for the percentage

336
00:20:51,240 --> 00:20:54,640
Speaker 1: of minority students to hit that level again, and that

337
00:20:54,800 --> 00:20:59,199
Speaker 1: took millions of dollars, a very long laundry list of

338
00:20:59,600 --> 00:21:04,160
Speaker 1: concerned efforts to kind of boost the enrollments of minority students,

339
00:21:04,920 --> 00:21:08,679
Speaker 1: and it still took over a decade without affirmative action.

340
00:21:09,200 --> 00:21:11,000
Speaker 1: There is going to be a drop off in the

341
00:21:11,000 --> 00:21:15,840
Speaker 1: most underrepresented cohorts of students. Kelsey, please stick around. We'll

342
00:21:15,880 --> 00:21:30,680
Speaker 1: talk more after the break. So what are schools that

343
00:21:30,960 --> 00:21:35,640
Speaker 1: don't allow racial preferences in selecting students? What are they

344
00:21:35,680 --> 00:21:39,639
Speaker 1: doing instead? So, one interesting thing that I didn't really

345
00:21:39,800 --> 00:21:42,240
Speaker 1: kind of think about before I started reporting this story

346
00:21:42,520 --> 00:21:45,359
Speaker 1: is that, yes, admissions is one part of the process,

347
00:21:45,440 --> 00:21:47,679
Speaker 1: but it's just that one part um. So a lot

348
00:21:47,720 --> 00:21:49,480
Speaker 1: of the schools that I talked to said that they're

349
00:21:49,560 --> 00:21:54,119
Speaker 1: kind of preparing to like widen the funnel for the

350
00:21:54,200 --> 00:21:57,280
Speaker 1: people that are applying to their schools, So that means

351
00:21:57,400 --> 00:22:02,480
Speaker 1: doing marketing campaigns, having their own alums that are part

352
00:22:02,520 --> 00:22:06,440
Speaker 1: of underrepresented groups, reach out to their high schools, um

353
00:22:06,480 --> 00:22:12,280
Speaker 1: developing relationships with community groups or high school counselors in

354
00:22:12,480 --> 00:22:16,639
Speaker 1: underrepresented areas to basically get the pool of applicants to

355
00:22:16,640 --> 00:22:19,479
Speaker 1: be more diverse, so then in the end, the student

356
00:22:19,520 --> 00:22:23,480
Speaker 1: body can be more diverse. And that doesn't move the

357
00:22:23,560 --> 00:22:27,439
Speaker 1: needle quite as much, quite as fast, but it is

358
00:22:27,480 --> 00:22:31,280
Speaker 1: an option. How are they preparing for the day when

359
00:22:31,280 --> 00:22:35,040
Speaker 1: they will no longer be allowed to use affirmative action?

360
00:22:35,160 --> 00:22:37,840
Speaker 1: What are they doing to try to make up for it.

361
00:22:40,160 --> 00:22:43,040
Speaker 1: There's a lot of different solutions that schools have done,

362
00:22:43,240 --> 00:22:46,280
Speaker 1: um you know, in the absence of affirmative action. One

363
00:22:46,280 --> 00:22:49,760
Speaker 1: of the most popular is admitting the top let's say

364
00:22:50,040 --> 00:22:53,959
Speaker 1: four percent or ten percent of each high school in

365
00:22:54,160 --> 00:22:57,040
Speaker 1: a state. So we saw that in Texas, which went

366
00:22:57,119 --> 00:23:00,760
Speaker 1: before the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court said that was constitutional.

367
00:23:01,359 --> 00:23:03,720
Speaker 1: What it does, even though it looks race neutral on

368
00:23:03,800 --> 00:23:07,200
Speaker 1: the face, it kind of relies on the fact that

369
00:23:07,440 --> 00:23:12,480
Speaker 1: neighborhoods are segregated, so you have the best performing students

370
00:23:12,480 --> 00:23:16,000
Speaker 1: from a let's say a neighborhood with mostly minorities that

371
00:23:16,160 --> 00:23:19,160
Speaker 1: have an opportunity to go to schools. And the idea

372
00:23:19,200 --> 00:23:21,959
Speaker 1: behind that is that it still provides a pathway for

373
00:23:22,000 --> 00:23:25,680
Speaker 1: those from underrepresented groups to get admittance to the best

374
00:23:25,720 --> 00:23:30,600
Speaker 1: schools because of the way race really is baked into

375
00:23:30,680 --> 00:23:33,800
Speaker 1: so many structural things. In the US. Another proxy is

376
00:23:33,800 --> 00:23:38,480
Speaker 1: considering socioeconomic status. So we know that on average, a

377
00:23:38,560 --> 00:23:41,920
Speaker 1: white family has six times the wealth of a black

378
00:23:41,960 --> 00:23:45,080
Speaker 1: family in the US, and so if you kind of

379
00:23:45,320 --> 00:23:48,639
Speaker 1: filter for socioeconomic status, you know, it's not perfect and

380
00:23:48,640 --> 00:23:51,119
Speaker 1: it won't get you to a dent of where you

381
00:23:51,200 --> 00:23:56,280
Speaker 1: need to be, but it can sometimes get underrepresented groups

382
00:23:56,280 --> 00:24:00,639
Speaker 1: that have been financially disadvantaged in the door without blicitly

383
00:24:00,800 --> 00:24:05,000
Speaker 1: using race. Another option is getting rid of legacy admissions.

384
00:24:05,080 --> 00:24:07,280
Speaker 1: We know this comes up a lot when we talk

385
00:24:07,320 --> 00:24:10,720
Speaker 1: about these very elite institutions, and there's a big one,

386
00:24:10,840 --> 00:24:13,680
Speaker 1: right if you went to Harvard or Yale, your kid

387
00:24:13,720 --> 00:24:16,639
Speaker 1: has a much better chance of getting into Harvard Yale exactly.

388
00:24:16,760 --> 00:24:19,560
Speaker 1: So we know that schools are trying to do away

389
00:24:19,600 --> 00:24:22,359
Speaker 1: with legacy admissions. Amherst just recently said that they're going

390
00:24:22,440 --> 00:24:24,199
Speaker 1: to do it, and they think that this is going

391
00:24:24,280 --> 00:24:25,879
Speaker 1: to be one of the things that's going to help

392
00:24:26,200 --> 00:24:29,719
Speaker 1: boost diversity at the school. There was a recent study

393
00:24:29,920 --> 00:24:35,360
Speaker 1: that showed that legacies aren't necessarily more qualified or better students,

394
00:24:35,440 --> 00:24:38,520
Speaker 1: but they do tend to be less racially diverse the

395
00:24:38,720 --> 00:24:42,000
Speaker 1: non legacies. So it's just another kind of tool in

396
00:24:42,040 --> 00:24:45,280
Speaker 1: the tool belt that schools are considering and thinking about.

397
00:24:47,200 --> 00:24:49,639
Speaker 1: Is that really realistic, because you know that sort of

398
00:24:49,720 --> 00:24:54,280
Speaker 1: legacy enrollment is also a big driver of fundraising certainly,

399
00:24:54,440 --> 00:24:57,600
Speaker 1: and it is a really big consideration. You know. One

400
00:24:57,640 --> 00:25:00,240
Speaker 1: thing that came up a lot was this I idea

401
00:25:00,359 --> 00:25:03,720
Speaker 1: of all this kind of calculus that admissions offices now

402
00:25:03,720 --> 00:25:05,679
Speaker 1: have to do. How much money they're going to be

403
00:25:05,720 --> 00:25:08,320
Speaker 1: willing to spend too, like I said, grow that funnel

404
00:25:08,640 --> 00:25:11,479
Speaker 1: so that their applicant pool can be more diverse. How

405
00:25:11,560 --> 00:25:14,080
Speaker 1: much money they're potentially willing to give up from things

406
00:25:14,200 --> 00:25:18,480
Speaker 1: like legacy admissions, and how much does this matter to them?

407
00:25:18,560 --> 00:25:21,520
Speaker 1: And how much money are they willing to put forward

408
00:25:21,520 --> 00:25:24,760
Speaker 1: to maybe only move the needle a little bit. When

409
00:25:24,800 --> 00:25:27,840
Speaker 1: you look down the road five or ten years from now,

410
00:25:28,280 --> 00:25:31,440
Speaker 1: given how long it's taken for schools that did away

411
00:25:31,480 --> 00:25:36,480
Speaker 1: with fromtive action to recoup the losses in underrepresented students,

412
00:25:37,000 --> 00:25:42,119
Speaker 1: how big a dip can we anticipate seeing in students

413
00:25:42,280 --> 00:25:44,960
Speaker 1: who otherwise would have been admitted, and how long will

414
00:25:44,960 --> 00:25:47,879
Speaker 1: it take to bring it back up? So what I

415
00:25:47,920 --> 00:25:51,800
Speaker 1: expect that will happen in the very near term. In

416
00:25:51,840 --> 00:25:54,880
Speaker 1: the years immediately followings, we'll see a sharp drop off.

417
00:25:55,359 --> 00:25:58,399
Speaker 1: For example, in California at u c l A, we

418
00:25:58,520 --> 00:26:02,879
Speaker 1: saw the percentage of black students dropped by like fift

419
00:26:04,119 --> 00:26:06,520
Speaker 1: So we'll see that immediate drop off. And for those

420
00:26:06,560 --> 00:26:12,160
Speaker 1: schools that don't put the resources, the creativity, and the

421
00:26:12,200 --> 00:26:16,960
Speaker 1: time into continuing to reach out to underrepresented groups, to

422
00:26:17,040 --> 00:26:21,480
Speaker 1: coming up with novel solutions to using proxies. They're never

423
00:26:21,520 --> 00:26:24,720
Speaker 1: going to catch up because the schools that have done

424
00:26:24,760 --> 00:26:27,920
Speaker 1: all that and spent millions of dollars over a decade

425
00:26:28,320 --> 00:26:32,480
Speaker 1: are still barely getting there and even falling ashore. As

426
00:26:32,520 --> 00:26:36,760
Speaker 1: it is, we haven't really seen the all the policies

427
00:26:36,800 --> 00:26:38,600
Speaker 1: that the schools are going to potentially put in place.

428
00:26:39,040 --> 00:26:41,800
Speaker 1: And you know, one question that is a really really

429
00:26:41,840 --> 00:26:44,720
Speaker 1: big one is schools want to know where the line

430
00:26:44,760 --> 00:26:47,280
Speaker 1: is going to be drawn. Are they able to still

431
00:26:47,320 --> 00:26:51,000
Speaker 1: come up with recruiting programs that target let's say, black

432
00:26:51,040 --> 00:26:53,600
Speaker 1: students or is that not even going to be allowed?

433
00:26:54,080 --> 00:26:58,000
Speaker 1: So where is that line drawn? Where? How far are

434
00:26:58,040 --> 00:27:01,160
Speaker 1: they allowed to go? Essentially like where does admissions process

435
00:27:01,840 --> 00:27:05,040
Speaker 1: per se start? Kelsey Butler, thanks so much for taking

436
00:27:05,040 --> 00:27:09,720
Speaker 1: the time. Thank you. You can find more stories by

437
00:27:09,920 --> 00:27:14,800
Speaker 1: Kelsey Butler and Patricia Hurtado and Greg Store on Bloomberg

438
00:27:14,840 --> 00:27:19,119
Speaker 1: dot com. Thanks for listening to us here at the

439
00:27:19,160 --> 00:27:23,200
Speaker 1: Big Take the Daily podcast from Bloomberg and I Heart Radio.

440
00:27:23,680 --> 00:27:26,520
Speaker 1: For more shows from my heart Radio, visit the i

441
00:27:26,640 --> 00:27:31,280
Speaker 1: Heart Radio app app podcast, or wherever you listen. Read

442
00:27:31,280 --> 00:27:35,160
Speaker 1: Today's story and subscribe to our daily newsletter at Bloomberg

443
00:27:35,240 --> 00:27:38,840
Speaker 1: dot com slash Big Take, and we'd love to hear

444
00:27:38,880 --> 00:27:42,680
Speaker 1: from you. Email us with questions or comments to Big

445
00:27:42,680 --> 00:27:47,800
Speaker 1: Take at Bloomberg dot net. The supervising producer of The

446
00:27:47,800 --> 00:27:52,040
Speaker 1: Big Take is Vicky Burgalina. Our senior producer is Katherine Fink.

447
00:27:52,520 --> 00:27:56,520
Speaker 1: Our producer is Rebecca Chasson. Our associate producer is sam

448
00:27:56,600 --> 00:28:01,200
Speaker 1: Goa Bauer. Hilda Garcia is our engineer. Original music by

449
00:28:01,320 --> 00:28:05,320
Speaker 1: Leo Sidrin. I'm West Cassova. We'll be back tomorrow with

450
00:28:05,480 --> 00:28:12,920
Speaker 1: another Big Take. H