WEBVTT - The U.S ban on race-based college admissions

0:00:01.280 --> 0:00:03.600
<v Speaker 1>My name is Lily Maddon and I'm a proud Arunda

0:00:03.800 --> 0:00:08.600
<v Speaker 1>Bunjelung Calcoltin woman from Gadighl Country. The Daily oz acknowledges

0:00:08.680 --> 0:00:10.880
<v Speaker 1>that this podcast is recorded on the lands of the

0:00:10.880 --> 0:00:14.440
<v Speaker 1>Gadighl people and pays respect to all Aboriginal and Torres

0:00:14.440 --> 0:00:17.360
<v Speaker 1>Straight island and nations. We pay our respects to the

0:00:17.400 --> 0:00:20.160
<v Speaker 1>first peoples of these countries, both past and present.

0:00:25.840 --> 0:00:28.159
<v Speaker 2>Good morning and welcome to the Daily os. It is

0:00:28.200 --> 0:00:29.760
<v Speaker 2>somehow Monday, the third of July.

0:00:30.080 --> 0:00:31.160
<v Speaker 3>I'm zara, I'm sam.

0:00:31.320 --> 0:00:34.440
<v Speaker 2>The US Supreme Court decision means that universities in the

0:00:34.560 --> 0:00:37.279
<v Speaker 2>US will no longer be able to consider race when

0:00:37.320 --> 0:00:38.760
<v Speaker 2>selecting prospective students.

0:00:38.840 --> 0:00:43.200
<v Speaker 4>The Supreme Court has struck down race based admissions policies

0:00:43.280 --> 0:00:46.800
<v Speaker 4>in colleges as unconstitutional.

0:00:46.080 --> 0:00:49.800
<v Speaker 2>Land marquees, so, returning nearly fifty years of precedent, the

0:00:49.920 --> 0:00:54.000
<v Speaker 2>latest example of the conservative majority redefining American law. This

0:00:54.080 --> 0:00:57.360
<v Speaker 2>means many colleges will have to change their admissions process

0:00:57.440 --> 0:01:00.920
<v Speaker 2>and move away from affirmative action. So how did this

0:01:00.960 --> 0:01:03.880
<v Speaker 2>all happen and what will the consequences be for racial

0:01:03.880 --> 0:01:06.560
<v Speaker 2>minorities in the US. We're going to let you know.

0:01:06.640 --> 0:01:09.560
<v Speaker 2>In today's Deep Dive, but first sam what is making

0:01:09.560 --> 0:01:16.200
<v Speaker 2>headlines this morning.

0:01:18.600 --> 0:01:21.920
<v Speaker 3>Protests in France have continued over the weekend in response

0:01:21.920 --> 0:01:25.920
<v Speaker 3>to the fatal police shooting of a teenager. France's Justice

0:01:26.000 --> 0:01:28.920
<v Speaker 3>minister confirmed thousands of people have been arrested over the

0:01:29.040 --> 0:01:31.959
<v Speaker 3>last five days, mostly in relation to the destruction of

0:01:32.040 --> 0:01:36.120
<v Speaker 3>property and vehicles. Prime Minister Emmanuel Macron has canceled a

0:01:36.120 --> 0:01:39.200
<v Speaker 3>state visit to Germany to oversee the crisis response.

0:01:42.480 --> 0:01:46.840
<v Speaker 2>Virgin Galactic has safely landed its first commercial flight. Passengers

0:01:46.880 --> 0:01:49.920
<v Speaker 2>experienced a few minutes of weightlessness as they were taken

0:01:49.960 --> 0:01:52.840
<v Speaker 2>to the edge of space. The flight above the US

0:01:52.960 --> 0:01:56.160
<v Speaker 2>lasted seventy two minutes. A commercial flight for the Virgin

0:01:56.200 --> 0:01:58.840
<v Speaker 2>Galactic has been in the works since two thousand and four,

0:01:58.960 --> 0:02:02.280
<v Speaker 2>and the company's next scheduled spaceflight is planned for August.

0:02:05.400 --> 0:02:08.680
<v Speaker 3>The King of the Netherlands, King Willem Alexander, has delivered

0:02:08.680 --> 0:02:12.200
<v Speaker 3>an official apology for his country's history of slavery, calling

0:02:12.240 --> 0:02:15.639
<v Speaker 3>it a horror. About six hundred thousand people were believed

0:02:15.680 --> 0:02:18.680
<v Speaker 3>to have been trafficked by Dutch slave traders, mostly in

0:02:18.680 --> 0:02:22.000
<v Speaker 3>the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. In the speech, the King

0:02:22.080 --> 0:02:25.680
<v Speaker 3>declared previous monarchs quotes took no steps against slavery and

0:02:25.760 --> 0:02:29.160
<v Speaker 3>asked for forgiveness for the crystal clear lack of action.

0:02:31.480 --> 0:02:34.280
<v Speaker 2>And the good news. New Zealand has banned thin plastic

0:02:34.320 --> 0:02:37.400
<v Speaker 2>bags for fruit and veggies across the country. The band

0:02:37.480 --> 0:02:40.400
<v Speaker 2>was formalized last year, but came into effect on Saturday.

0:02:40.840 --> 0:02:43.560
<v Speaker 2>Plastic sticker labels for fruits and veggies will also be

0:02:43.560 --> 0:02:49.480
<v Speaker 2>phased out. The U s. Supreme Court has ruled that

0:02:49.600 --> 0:02:54.480
<v Speaker 2>universities can't directly consider race in their selection processes. The

0:02:54.560 --> 0:02:58.000
<v Speaker 2>decision restricts the ability of universities to pursue what's called

0:02:58.040 --> 0:03:01.760
<v Speaker 2>affirmative action to boost representation of racial minorities.

0:03:01.960 --> 0:03:04.640
<v Speaker 3>I feel like affirmative action is one of those words

0:03:04.680 --> 0:03:06.919
<v Speaker 3>that's thrown around the news, but we don't actually take

0:03:06.960 --> 0:03:10.359
<v Speaker 3>the time to think about what it is. What is it?

0:03:10.800 --> 0:03:14.600
<v Speaker 2>So affirmative action is basically a way of trying to

0:03:14.760 --> 0:03:19.160
<v Speaker 2>correct historical prejudice. And the way that affirmative action goes

0:03:19.160 --> 0:03:23.079
<v Speaker 2>about it is by actively taking diversity into account when

0:03:23.120 --> 0:03:27.160
<v Speaker 2>looking at applications. So in this instance, for universities got it.

0:03:27.600 --> 0:03:31.360
<v Speaker 2>So this started in the nineteen seventies when the Supreme

0:03:31.400 --> 0:03:34.440
<v Speaker 2>Court ruled that colleges could use race as a factor

0:03:34.480 --> 0:03:38.680
<v Speaker 2>when considering applications to universities. So this idea that in

0:03:38.720 --> 0:03:41.600
<v Speaker 2>the past, certain minority groups hadn't been able to access

0:03:41.720 --> 0:03:45.280
<v Speaker 2>universities to the same degree as perhaps their white counterparts had,

0:03:45.720 --> 0:03:48.040
<v Speaker 2>and there was then a recognition that race should play

0:03:48.080 --> 0:03:51.920
<v Speaker 2>a role in applications. So it's not necessarily that race

0:03:52.120 --> 0:03:55.440
<v Speaker 2>would per se be the determining factor or the only

0:03:55.520 --> 0:03:59.160
<v Speaker 2>factor that allowed someone entry into university, but it basically

0:03:59.240 --> 0:04:04.040
<v Speaker 2>meant that those people assessing applications could consider race during.

0:04:03.760 --> 0:04:05.520
<v Speaker 3>These process as one factor exactly.

0:04:06.040 --> 0:04:10.680
<v Speaker 2>So this story specifically focuses on two universities who use

0:04:10.800 --> 0:04:15.440
<v Speaker 2>affirmative action processes. That's Harvard, heard of that one and

0:04:15.600 --> 0:04:17.680
<v Speaker 2>the University of North Carolina, all.

0:04:17.680 --> 0:04:20.039
<v Speaker 3>Right, and what's happened with those two institutions.

0:04:20.480 --> 0:04:24.000
<v Speaker 2>So the Supreme Court was considering two cases that challenged

0:04:24.040 --> 0:04:27.400
<v Speaker 2>the legality of admissions processes at these two unis at

0:04:27.440 --> 0:04:31.200
<v Speaker 2>Harvard and the University of North Carolina, and their affirmative

0:04:31.200 --> 0:04:34.960
<v Speaker 2>action practices were challenged on the basis that students were

0:04:35.080 --> 0:04:39.440
<v Speaker 2>arguing it was unconstitutional because it was basically, in their eyes,

0:04:39.600 --> 0:04:40.480
<v Speaker 2>racial discrimination.

0:04:40.880 --> 0:04:42.919
<v Speaker 3>So Zira, what were the grounds of the case.

0:04:43.000 --> 0:04:46.200
<v Speaker 2>Well, basically, the case depended on how to interpret the

0:04:46.240 --> 0:04:50.560
<v Speaker 2>fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution. So this specific amendment, the

0:04:50.600 --> 0:04:55.200
<v Speaker 2>fourteenth one, was added after the abolition of slavery, and

0:04:55.240 --> 0:04:58.760
<v Speaker 2>it gave US citizens the right to equal protection under

0:04:58.800 --> 0:05:02.720
<v Speaker 2>the law. That's a direct quote. It was explicitly added

0:05:02.760 --> 0:05:07.000
<v Speaker 2>to address racial discrimination against former slaves. So the question

0:05:07.120 --> 0:05:11.680
<v Speaker 2>is then whether this racial discrimination point, the equal protection point,

0:05:11.880 --> 0:05:15.640
<v Speaker 2>should apply equally to everyone or specifically be used to

0:05:15.720 --> 0:05:21.479
<v Speaker 2>allow will say positive discrimination to counteract racial inequality. Since

0:05:21.680 --> 0:05:24.880
<v Speaker 2>nineteen seventy eight, the Supreme Court has effectively held the

0:05:24.960 --> 0:05:28.719
<v Speaker 2>latter view, which created a precedent and allowed affirmative action.

0:05:28.880 --> 0:05:30.960
<v Speaker 3>And that's what's been to play in a number of

0:05:31.040 --> 0:05:34.840
<v Speaker 3>US universities. But that's now changed. Did we hear anything

0:05:35.000 --> 0:05:37.960
<v Speaker 3>from the Supreme Court justices about how they came to

0:05:38.000 --> 0:05:38.799
<v Speaker 3>this new decision.

0:05:39.040 --> 0:05:41.520
<v Speaker 2>So it was a six ' to three decision. Six

0:05:41.600 --> 0:05:45.200
<v Speaker 2>judges voted in favor, three against, and that means that

0:05:45.200 --> 0:05:49.120
<v Speaker 2>the court overturned the view and declared that university's affirmative

0:05:49.160 --> 0:05:54.360
<v Speaker 2>action policies were unconstitutional. In terms of explaining their position,

0:05:54.640 --> 0:05:57.919
<v Speaker 2>the majority of justices argued that while race could be

0:05:58.000 --> 0:06:01.080
<v Speaker 2>considered if it was tied to a student's quality of character.

0:06:01.920 --> 0:06:06.360
<v Speaker 2>Policies could not allow quote stereotyping and could never treat

0:06:06.480 --> 0:06:10.000
<v Speaker 2>race as a quote negative factor. And so what these

0:06:10.080 --> 0:06:14.520
<v Speaker 2>Supreme Court justices were arguing was that by positively viewing

0:06:14.839 --> 0:06:18.680
<v Speaker 2>some races i e. It was helpful in a person's application,

0:06:19.279 --> 0:06:22.080
<v Speaker 2>it ultimately meant that other races had the opposite effect,

0:06:22.480 --> 0:06:25.160
<v Speaker 2>and that if it was seen as a positive contributing

0:06:25.160 --> 0:06:28.680
<v Speaker 2>factor in some applications, inevitably it would mean the opposite

0:06:28.720 --> 0:06:31.560
<v Speaker 2>in other applications. And so I'll read out a quote

0:06:31.560 --> 0:06:35.080
<v Speaker 2>of what the Court's decision said. It said, many universities have,

0:06:35.240 --> 0:06:38.320
<v Speaker 2>for too long wrongly concluded that the touchstone of an

0:06:38.360 --> 0:06:43.680
<v Speaker 2>individual's identity is not challenges bested, skills built, or lessons learned,

0:06:43.760 --> 0:06:47.920
<v Speaker 2>but the color of their skin. This nation's constitutional history

0:06:47.960 --> 0:06:49.800
<v Speaker 2>does not tolerate that choice.

0:06:50.040 --> 0:06:52.839
<v Speaker 3>So it's important to note the current makeup of the

0:06:52.880 --> 0:06:56.480
<v Speaker 3>Supreme Court. We have a majority conservative leaning Supreme Court.

0:06:57.279 --> 0:07:00.360
<v Speaker 3>What did the three justices who opposed the decisions.

0:07:00.360 --> 0:07:02.880
<v Speaker 2>Well, we had some very strong statements from them. We

0:07:02.960 --> 0:07:06.279
<v Speaker 2>had Justice Sonya Sotomayor who said that it had undone

0:07:06.360 --> 0:07:10.640
<v Speaker 2>decades of precedent and momentous progress. She argued the purpose

0:07:10.680 --> 0:07:14.440
<v Speaker 2>of equal protection was to address racial inequality and that

0:07:14.520 --> 0:07:18.400
<v Speaker 2>this inequality still exists, and pointed to racial disparities in

0:07:18.440 --> 0:07:22.360
<v Speaker 2>poverty and educational outcomes to prove her point. She called

0:07:22.360 --> 0:07:25.680
<v Speaker 2>the US quote a segregated society where race has always

0:07:25.680 --> 0:07:30.560
<v Speaker 2>mattered and continues to matter. Equality requires acknowledgment of inequality.

0:07:31.040 --> 0:07:34.400
<v Speaker 2>Fairly strong statement there. There was also President Joe Biden

0:07:34.440 --> 0:07:36.800
<v Speaker 2>who spoke out against the ruling. He is, of course

0:07:36.880 --> 0:07:40.840
<v Speaker 2>a Democrat, and the majority of the Supreme Court justices

0:07:40.880 --> 0:07:45.400
<v Speaker 2>have been appointed by Republicans. He strongly disagrees with the

0:07:45.480 --> 0:07:46.960
<v Speaker 2>decision because the truth is.

0:07:47.000 --> 0:07:52.680
<v Speaker 4>We all know it. Discrimination still exists in America. Discrimination

0:07:52.880 --> 0:07:57.000
<v Speaker 4>still exists to America. Today's decision does not change that.

0:07:57.640 --> 0:08:01.520
<v Speaker 4>It's a simple fact I A student had has overcome

0:08:01.600 --> 0:08:06.600
<v Speaker 4>had to overcome adversity under path education. Collet should recognize.

0:08:06.120 --> 0:08:09.000
<v Speaker 3>And value there. We obviously spend a lot of time

0:08:09.000 --> 0:08:12.280
<v Speaker 3>in the media talking about racial inequality in the US,

0:08:12.680 --> 0:08:15.000
<v Speaker 3>but it's also an important discussion to have in an

0:08:15.040 --> 0:08:19.280
<v Speaker 3>Australian context. How does affirmative action play out here at home?

0:08:20.040 --> 0:08:24.160
<v Speaker 2>So Australian law allows affirmative action and other forms of

0:08:24.240 --> 0:08:28.960
<v Speaker 2>what we'll call positive discrimination in some circumstances. According to

0:08:29.080 --> 0:08:32.679
<v Speaker 2>the Australian Human Rights Commission, discrimination is permitted if its

0:08:32.720 --> 0:08:36.120
<v Speaker 2>aim is to quote foster greater inequality by supporting groups

0:08:36.160 --> 0:08:40.640
<v Speaker 2>of people who face or have faced entrench discrimination. So,

0:08:40.840 --> 0:08:44.000
<v Speaker 2>according to them, this may include, but isn't limited to,

0:08:44.080 --> 0:08:48.520
<v Speaker 2>things like race, sex, sexual orientation, and gender identity. I

0:08:48.520 --> 0:08:51.920
<v Speaker 2>think the last thing I'll say is that it we're

0:08:51.920 --> 0:08:55.000
<v Speaker 2>certainly living through a period where we have seen many

0:08:55.200 --> 0:08:59.040
<v Speaker 2>momentous Supreme Court decisions that are overturning precedents that have

0:08:59.080 --> 0:09:02.040
<v Speaker 2>been in place for a number of decades. I mean,

0:09:02.040 --> 0:09:04.439
<v Speaker 2>we just marked the one year anniversary of Roe v.

0:09:04.559 --> 0:09:07.400
<v Speaker 2>Wade being overturned by the Supreme Court, and here we

0:09:07.480 --> 0:09:11.559
<v Speaker 2>have another really monumental shift in policy in the US.

0:09:11.600 --> 0:09:13.480
<v Speaker 2>It's a fascinating time to watch.

0:09:19.480 --> 0:09:21.960
<v Speaker 3>Thank you for joining us on the Daily OS this morning.

0:09:22.240 --> 0:09:24.880
<v Speaker 3>If you learned something from today's episode, don't forget to

0:09:24.960 --> 0:09:27.640
<v Speaker 3>hit subscribe, so there's a TDA episode waiting for you

0:09:27.720 --> 0:09:30.720
<v Speaker 3>every morning. We'll be back again tomorrow. Until then, have

0:09:30.800 --> 0:09:36.640
<v Speaker 3>a great day.