By Dr. Julianne Malveaux
During this session, the Supreme Court will consider affirmative action in two cases brought by “Students for Fair Admissions” opposing affirmative action policies at Harvard University and the University of North Carolina. This organisation represents “20,000 students, parents, and others who believe that racial classifications and preferences in college admissions are unfair, unnecessary, and unconstitutional,” according to its website. Where were these people when African Americans were explicitly denied admission to colleges? Where were they when Black people had to sue for admission?
Take, for example, the George V. McLaurin. McLaurin, an African American man, was denied admission to a graduate programme at Oklahoma University solely on the basis of his race in the Oklahoma State REents case. It was illegal in Oklahoma in 1950 to attend, teach at, or run a school that accepted both white and black students. This university was funded by tax payers, including Black citizens. Although this was affirmative action for white people, no “Students for Fair Admissions” protested the racist policy.
Anti-blackness was once acceptable, and it still exists today. In a racist society, the bizarre concept of race neutrality is nothing more than historical denial. Affirmative action, minority set-asides, and other race-conscious solutions are merely antidotes to historical structural racism. These “Students for Fair Admission” have accepted the blatant unfairness of national public policy towards Black people. Slavery was not a race-neutral institution. Jim Crow laws were not apolitical. Fair Housing redlining was not colorblind. Students for Fair Admissions, on the other hand, want race neutrality. They require an education in American history that they did not receive because they did not study how so-called race neutrality has harmed Black people.
George McLaurin was segregated in the library, classrooms, and cafeteria after being admitted to Oklahoma University. His “inconvenience” was deemed minor by the lower court. After a multi-year battle, the Supreme Court ruled in McLaurin’s favour. Meanwhile, Oklahoma University found his presence in the classroom so inconvenient that he was forced to listen to lectures in a closet separate from the classroom space for other students.
McLaurin was not the only student who tried to gain admission to Oklahoma State University, nor was he the only one who challenged the admissions process in court. Ada Lois Sopuel Fisher applied to the University of Oklahoma’s law school but was denied admission due to her race. She was admitted in 1949 and graduated in 1951 as a result of the NAACP and the McLaurin agitation. In 1992, she was appointed to the OU Board of Regents.
Justice delayed has been justice denied in Oklahoma and many other states. McLaurin, like many other plaintiffs, was over 60 when he filed his lawsuit. He earned a master’s degree and taught at HBCU Langston University for over 30 years. However, the Supreme Court case appeared to have taken its toll on him. There is no record of him graduating, but his wife, Peninah, received a master’s degree in home economics from OU in 1954. George McLaurin passed away in 1968.
Do these Fair Admissions Students understand this? Do they care that George McLaurin and so many others were treated unfairly? Does it matter to them that affirmative action is the antidote to this injustice? Or do privileged whites and white-adjacent people (such as Asian Americans who embrace anti-Blackness and white privilege) stew in their delusory superiority in order to attack Black people?
Affirmative action opened doors that had previously been closed to Black students. The “Students for Fair Admissions” want to shut the doors once more. Clarence Thomas, Associate Justice, has his fingerprints all over this. Students for Fair Admissions is represented by two of his former law clerks. Thomas is a study in racial contradictions, but the best analysis comes from Associate Justice Thurgood Marshall, who said that a snake is a snake whether it is black or white. Thomas considers himself to be a constitutional strict constructionist. He exemplifies how Black people can embrace anti-Blackness and deny history in order to appease and embrace white predatory capitalists.
Students for Fair Admissions and their Thomas-connected allies deny history, but their anti-Black attacks are not unique. Let us not fall for their “race neutrality” rhetoric. Denying race history and racial oppression is the epitome of anti-Blackness.
Dr. Julianne Malveaux is an economist, author, and the Dean of Cal State LA’s College of Ethnic Studies. Juliannemalveaux.com