The Supreme Court’s decision to gut Affirmative Action last week has had an immediate impact.
Beleaguered colleges and universities across many states, particularly those in red states already under extreme pressure to change their policies, offices and lesson plans due to discriminatory legislation passed by authoritarian governors like DeSantis and Abbott, are now facing new demands by state governments to eliminate the consideration of race in college admissions.
In Missouri and Wisconsin, Republicans giddily and quickly unleashed their devious anti-affirmative action rhetoric after the Supreme Court’s decision.
Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey directed a letter to dozens of universities and municipalities demanding they immediately end race-based affirmative action policies.
“Missouri institutions must identify all policies that give preference to individuals on the basis of race and immediately halt the implementation of such policies,” wrote Bailey.
Bailey’s demands are clear, and so is his letter’s coded language. He takes explicit aim at those seeking parity for marginalized communities through ideas such as eliminating the reliance on standardized tests by labeling them “advocates of race discrimination in college admissions.”
There are more than 300,000 individuals currently attending institutions of higher education in Missouri, yet the enrollment demographics expose the absurdity of race discrimination claims occurring in the state.
The two biggest universities are the University of Missouri and Missouri State University.
According to Data USA, in 2020 the former had a total enrollment of 31,089. There were 23,605 white students (75.9%), 2,061 Black students (6.63%) and 1,542 Hispanic/Latino students (4.96%). In 2022, according to the University of Missouri, total enrollment rose to 31,318 students and white students totaled 23,929 (76.4%), Black students 1,709 (5.5%) and Hispanic/Latino 1,652 (5.3%).
In 2021, according to the Missouri State Office of Institutional Research, total enrollment was 22,926. White students numbered 18,044 (78.7%), Black 785 (3.4%) and Hispanic/Latino 1,024 (4.5%). In 2022, total enrollment was 23,307, of which 17,414 (74.7%) were white, 729 (3.1%) were Black and 1,082 (4.6%) were Hispanic/Latino.
At both institutions, Black enrollment is decreasing while white enrollment has either increased or decreased slightly.
So it appears that affirmative action isn’t contributing to race discrimination in Missouri, unless all white student bodies are desired (which we know some desperately want).
Over in Wisconsin, Republican legislators emboldened by the Supreme Court’s decision are now reportedly targeting minority scholarships.
The effort is spearheaded by Robin Vos, speaker of the Wisconsin State Assembly, who, when responding to a tweet about scholarships designed for minority students, tweeted “We are reviewing the decision and will introduce legislation to correct the discriminatory laws on the books and pass repeals in the fall.”
Vos and his fellow Wisconsin Republicans are unapologetically and mercilessly targeting diversity efforts. They previously voted to cut $32 million from the University of Wisconsin System’s budget unless it reallocated funds from DEI efforts to workforce development.
The viciously divisive antics by Republicans in these states mirror those of Republicans across the country who are attacking higher education as a means of oppression. After implementing voter suppression and district gerrymandering strategies in red states, they’ve now taken aim at all levels of education.
The attacks on higher ed are vicious, steeped in Jim Crow and completely unnecessary and they come as education costs have soared and national enrollment numbers are declining.
According to the National Center for Education Statistics, “Between fall 2010 and fall 2021, total undergraduate enrollment in degree-granting postsecondary institutions decreased by 15 percent (from 18.1 million to 15.4 million students).” And Fall 2021 enrollment fell 3% versus Fall 2020 (15.4 million and 15.9 million, respectively).
But instead of helping to stem rising costs and dwindling enrollment, they would rather attack affirmative action and further depress enrollment, which could lead to increased tuition.
Black Student Athletes and Affirmative Action
Lost in the aftermath of the Supreme Court’s unjust decision is the Black student-athlete.
Black male student-athletes make up the majority of the biggest programs in college sports, football and basketball. But will these athletes want to sign with a school with a dwindling Black student body? Will that have an impact on where they choose to sign?
Let’s say two Black high school seniors hail from a small, rural town. One has the athletic talent to thrive on the field and the other the academic talent to succeed in the classroom. The coaching staff at the University of Wisconsin, after seeing his highlight reel online, spends hours traveling to meet the athlete and offers him a football scholarship. But since both affirmative action and minority scholarships have been eliminated, the University doesn’t spend time or resources to learn about, or meet, the student, nor does it have the funding to offer him an academic scholarship meant to help applicants like him.
This is a common occurrence, one that will be exacerbated after SCOTUS’ decision.
And for those about to argue that race doesn’t matter in athletic recruiting, I say look at team participation statistics.
According to the NCAA’s database, Black players are the largest demographic for all DI, non-HBCU, FBS autonomy (Power Five) football programs, and have been since at least 2012.
Yet at all of these institutions, Black male students make up single digits of the total student enrollment. But when you look at the percentage of Black male students who are athletes, that number jumps to double digits.
Most important to note is the fact that white students still make up the majority of scholarship athletes in these programs. In 2022, white athletes made up 59% of all male NCAA student-athletes; Black athletes only 20%. That means Black athletes have a harder time earning athletic scholarships outside of football and basketball.
Add in the fact that many inner-city schools lack the resources and facilities to properly field and run teams in sports like lacrosse, soccer, hockey, swimming and baseball, the scholarship opportunity outlook is even bleaker.
Now that affirmative action has been repealed and attacks on other avenues to balance the scales for Black and Brown students are under attack, we can expect the number of Black male students at P5 schools to continue to decrease while the percentage of Black student-athletes in the total Black student body grows.
Another factor contributing to this assumption is NIL.
NIL has helped some Black athletes earn compensation for their athletic accomplishments, and with NIL collectives only growing in number and financial backing, compensation will continue to grow.
But NIL doesn’t help Black students. And if states like Wisconsin have their way, scholarships won’t help them either.
Affirmative Action and athletic recruiting are similar in theory. They both seek talent in places some overlook. Just ask Joy Reid, who was recruited by Harvard from a small town in Colorado because she was qualified and Harvard wanted her to consider the university as an option.
Yet the difference between the two is that the talents and qualifications of Black students are often questioned at the start, as Reid realyed, because of their skin color, while Black student athletes are quickly embraced because of their athletic prowess.
The gutting of Affirmative Action will drastically reduce opportunities for qualified Black students who might get passed over in a large pool of applicants which, as evidenced by enrollment numbers, have the same complexion. For Black student athletes, it rehashes the notion that the path to success for Black people is through athletics, not education.
And while athletics are a viable path for success, it shouldn’t be the leading one.
The Supreme Court’s decision has had immediate impact, but the effects won’t be seen or felt for some time.
So for now, the fight continues.
