As demoralizing as last week’s Supreme Court decision effectively striking down affirmative action in higher education was for those of us who are realistic about the state of the country’s race relations, we saw in Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson a bright light. In her powerful dissenting opinion, the third African American on the court and the first African American woman provided a masterful account of race relations in the United States and an indictment of the myth of “color-blindness.”
The third African American on the court provided a masterful account of race relations in the United States and an indictment of the myth of “color-blindness.”
Jackson’s dissent should be necessary reading for all Americans, especially those who have accepted the lie that race does not meaningfully affect American society. In a scathing criticism of her conservative colleagues, she provides an elegant history lesson —charting the policies and laws that upheld racial discrimination and deepened inequality in the United States. From Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857), which declared that an African American had “no rights which the white man was bound to respect,” to the Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) decision that codified Jim Crow and later racist practices such as redlining, Jackson enumerated some of the many ways Black people have been treated as second-class citizens.
“Gulf-sized race-based gaps exist with respect to the health, wealth, and well-being of American citizens,” she wrote. “They were created in the distant past, but have indisputably been passed down to the present day through the generations.”
Reminiscent of Thurgood Marshall, who before he became the first African American on the Supreme court was the lawyer who successfully argued the case that ended “separate but equal” policies in U.S. schools, Justice Jackson, in her dissent, laid out a case for the significance of affirmative action in higher education.
Marshall was a significant figure in the Civil Rights Movement, but last week’s 6-3 decision is an attack on the progress made during that movement that will have devastating consequences for members of marginalized groups. It represents a major blow to diversity in higher education.
President Joe Biden nominated Jackson to the bench last year after he had promised on the campaign trail to nominate the first African American woman to the Supreme Court. His promise to name an African American woman was criticized by those who argued that such an appointment would somehow result in an unqualified nominee.
However, Jackson has already demonstrated why her nomination was one of the best decisions Biden has made. Jackson is not only a brilliant attorney, but one of the sharpest thinkers of our time. Her dissenting opinion last week offers just a glimpse of her remarkable command of the law — as well as the history and impact of affirmative action in higher education.
In effectively ending affirmative action, the court’s conservative majority sided with the Students for Fair Admissions, whose lawsuit alleged that admissions policies at Harvard discriminate against Asian American applicants “and give unlawful and unfair preferences to white, Hispanic and Black applicants.” Although Jackson recused herself from the Harvard case, she weighed in on a related case brought by the Students for Fair Admissions against the University of North Carolina, which argued that the university discriminated against white and Asian American students. While critics of affirmative action in higher education rejoice over the recent ruling, it undermines the nation’s effort to level the playing field and offer some redress for centuries of educational and economic inequality directed at Black and Hispanic students.
The reality is simple. That ruling represents a major setback for students from marginalized communities who already face significant barriers to accessing quality education in this country. As Crystal Sanders, an associate professor of African American studies at Emory University and author of “A Chance for Change,” explained to me, “The consequences of this decision are of a magnitude that cannot easily be quantified.” She added, “Without meaningful and concrete efforts to increase diversity in higher education, there will be fewer nonwhite physicians, attorneys, and teachers.”
Justice Jackson made that clear in her dissenting opinion.
The need for affirmative action in higher education is evident by simply considering the history of education in the United States. During the antebellum period, white slaveholders barred enslaved Black people from learning how to read and write, and the Black people who did learn often learned through covert methods.









