UC Files Brief in Support of Race-Based Admissions Policies

Sara Grossman, The Daily Californian, August 13, 2012

UC President Mark Yudof and the chancellors of all 10 UC campuses submitted a “friend of the court” brief Monday to the U.S. Supreme Court declaring support for the University of Texas at Austin in a contentious case challenging the use of race in undergraduate admissions.

The case, Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin, involves a white student who claims that the university racially discriminated against her due to its policy of considering race in the admission process. {snip}

Currently, however, the UC system does not acknowledge race in its own admissions decisions due to the 1996 passage of Proposition 209, which made it illegal for state-funded institutions to consider factors such as race or ethnicity in admissions or hiring decisions.

“The facts tell us the educational and societal benefits from a diverse student body cannot be realized fully at the nation’s largest highly selective university system without the judicious use of tools that take race into account during undergraduate admissions decisions,” said UC President Mark Yudof about the UC in a press release. “Telling that story is the appropriate thing to do in the context of this legal case.”

The brief, titled “The Limited and Disappointing Results of the University’s Race-Neutral Admissions Initiatives,” describes the UC system’s failure to maintain a racially diverse student body due to race-neutral admissions policies instituted under Prop. 209.

Although the UC has adopted numerous strategies to address the issue of race in higher education, none have “enabled the University of California fully to reverse the precipitous decline in minority admission and enrollment that followed the enactment of Prop. 209, nor to keep pace with the growing population of underrepresented minorities in the applicant pool of qualified high school graduates,” according to the brief.


[Editor’s Note: The full amicus brief can be found here.]

Topics: , ,

Share This

We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • JohnEngelman

    It seems like the University of California is trying to get around the clear purpose of 
    Prop. 209.

  • Rocky Bass,

    Hell, everyone knows in this, the new, modern, progressive, and improved society we live in now, Merit has lost it’s Merit. Being competent was WAY overrated. I am sure Obongo only seeks treatment for his daughters in places where the staff meets “diversity” requirements.

  • Dawesy

    So, after what is probably millions/billions of dollars spent on “the educational and societal benefits from a diverse student body” totally and utterly FAILED (admittedly so), maybe they should go back to some crazy idea like GPAs and SAT scores. Not everybody is university material, period.

    • The__Bobster

      GPA’s can be misleading. A 4.0 in a Afrovoodoo school isn’t even equivalent to a 2.0 in a White suburban school. That’s why saying you’ll only take the top 20% of every school is misleading.

  • Dr Al

    WHAT?  Notice this phrase:   “………the applicant pool of qualified high school graduates,” 

    IF THEY ARE QUALIFIED, why do they need to be admitted according to SKIN color? Please, somebody, explain that.  

    Then, there is this phrase as well:  “The facts tell us the educational and societal benefits from a diverse student body….”  What facts?  Do not facts also tell us that Africans and Mexicans have LOWER I.Q.?  If they are “qualified” as stated in my rant above, then just admit them, since they are just as qualified as the WHITE students?  Yes?

    The fact that we have these “diverse” races with us NOT proves that it is NOT beneficial to society but disruptive and harmful.  If it was good, why do we have all these legal, moral, social and educational problems?  The problems we are having are CAUSED by diversity.

    I’m too smart for this world.

  • Ed_NY

    “The facts tell us the educational and societal benefits from a diverse student body cannot be realized fully at the nation’s largest highly selective university system without the judicious use of tools that take race into account during undergraduate admissions decisions,” said UC President Mark Yudof

    In reply to the above quote, there are no benefits to education or society by allowing unqualified minorities to push away and deny the majority a chance at achieving a higher education!

    Our formally respected institutions of higher education are nothing but diploma mills for the minority.  An educated minority means the same as an uneducated minority as far as I am concerned.

    • libertarian1234

      Absolutely right.

      Mark Yudof doesn’t realize it, but he is a cult member.


      He has been mentally conditioned to believe an illogical concept that is contrary to proven facts and has nothing to do with the field in which he is working and is no more than a foolish ideology.

      What does “diversity” have to do with education?”   Absolutely nothing.  The claims that learning about other cultures, races and lifestyles by having aliens within a learning environment as part of being “educated” is nonsense.

      Diversity is a concept that requires a repetitious bombardment of illogical tenets in order to inculcate the ideology in a victim.  Over and over and over again.  That these tenets have no basis in fact is similar in part to a process of brainwashing that caused 900 people to line-up and drink cyanide-laced kool aid in Jonestown and all the members of the Heaven’s Gate Sect to commit suicide when the mothership failed to arrive to take them to Jupiter.

      Mark Yodof could have just as easily been fanatically promoting a sect like Jonestown or Heaven’s Gate, but the diversity hounds got to him first, so it is diversity he mindlessly promotes as if  it is the most important thing in the world, so important to him he places it ahead of education in importance, just as the Heaven’s Gate members placed the importance of emigrating to Jupiter more important than life itself. 

      I have no doubt if Yudof or those like him were pressed to throw themselves under a bus, thinking it would advance their perverted beliefs, they would now be lying on a slab somewhere with tire tracks across their backs.

      And, if a conservative speaker is scheduled to speak on their campus it is common for them to chain themselves together to prevent a view in opposition to their bizarre ideology, and if they’re asked why they do that they will tell you………..with tears streaming down their hysterical-looking faces…..it is because they hate fanatics.

  • Berkeley Redneck

    Yet another example of how race is only a ‘social construct’ when it doesn’t get in the way of scapegoating an arbitrarily defined group known as ‘white.’ 

    To be sure, an honest case can be made that American Indians and  African-Americans have faced oppression in the United States. However the decision to track the status of these particular groups so closely is itself a demonstration of political and moral power. Has that power tipped over into privilege? That’s debatable, perhaps; but there are many ways to measure who is ‘privileged’ and who is not — a decision that hints to me that those who are designed as ‘privileged, ‘are in fact less powerful, not more so. Are rural whites under-represented at the University of California? How about Mormons? How about children of all races from single-parent households? If not, why not? Who decides, for whose benefit?  It is clear that ‘white,’ has become a way to attach guilt to diverse groups of peoples in a way that starts to look very irrational once you break this group apart into its somewhat arbitrary components. Maybe what’s most disturbing is how this is used to deflect attention away from the very real privileges of powerful and privileged people — such as University administrators who are paid generous salaries — by allowing them to rub the blame and guilt for their perks and salaries off on less privileged and powerful people, while deflecting attention away from the handoff — and in fact burnishing their own moral credentials — by rubbing the guilt off on those who share nothing with them but the arbitary designation of being ‘white.’ For example, can an Arab, who is designated as ‘white,’ be held responsible for the slavery in the antebellum South? As an Arab, of course not; but as a ‘white’ person the answer is yes (look for Arab-Americans to shed the label of ‘white,’ as their political power grows). How about the descendant of relatively recent Polish or Irish immigrants?  And how about that tiny minority of whites who actually _are_ the descendants of slave-owners? Looking at this group as a distinct group, rather than as generic ‘whites,’ complicates things, at least  to me. Over a quarter of Southern white men of military age died during the war between the states. How many white descendants of slave owners  have family who died during the war between the states? Lost homes? Did it not take the South more than a century to recover from the war? What is the price that this group has already paid? What price is appropriate? Can the descendants of these slave-owners be held accountable for the actions of their ancestors? What, if any, benefits do these descendants of slave-owners retain? And how does this group’s ‘guilt,’ differ from the African-American descendants of slave owners? Maybe it should be different. Maybe there are real privileges that the white descendants of slave owners retain, but it’s a tricky question. Much simpler, then, to attach guilt all whites for an ‘invisible knapsack’ of privileges that may exist in certain situations where other ‘whites’ are the majority, a transgression that is unacceptable among whites in ways that similar behavior among non-whites is not. 

  •  “The facts tell us the educational and societal benefits from a diverse
    student body cannot be realized fully at the nation’s largest highly
    selective university system without the judicious use of tools that take
    race into account during undergraduate admissions decisions,”

    Still waiting on the “facts” about why diversity is supposedly so beneficial.

    This is one issue i’ve never seen an anti-racist address. Diversity is our greatest strength because it just is and you’re a bigot if you have to ask why. That’s not very convincing.

    • Enar_Larsson

       I have not read the entire brief, but in the summary of the argument, Grutter v Bollinger is quoted as establishing that “student body diversity is a compelling state interest that can justify the use of race in university admissions.” The brief goes on to explain what the justices in that case see as the compelling interest:

      1. The “knowledge and opportunity” that come from institutions of higher learning lead to “effective participation” in the “civic life” of our nation. If we want all races to participate in that civic life, they must all have access to institutions of higher learning. My gloss: without a college education, minorities will not be productive members of society; they will not be engaged in civic life. For confirmation, see Robert Putnam’s paper on diversity and social capital.

      2. Minorities “must have confidence in the openness and integrity of the educational institutions that provide this training”. My gloss: If minority groups feel that they are being denied admission, they may decide to do bad things to us.

      3. “the Court observed [in Grutter] that universities and law schools “represent the training ground for a large number of our Nation’s leaders,” and opined that for leaders to have “legitimacy in the eyes of the citizenry,” it is necessary that “the path to leadership be visibly open to talented and qualified individuals of every race and ethnicity.” My gloss: If minorities aren’t being groomed in the top schools for elite positions of power, they may decide to do bad things to us.

      4. Student body diversity “‘better prepares students for an increasingly diverse workforce and society, and better prepares them as professionals.” My gloss: It’s better for white students to learn what to say and not to say, what to do and what not to do, around minorities now rather than later. May as well give them a heads up.

  • The NFL is 78% diverse.  They got an award from Tides Foundation for that level of diversity.

  • Tom

    “The facts tell us the educational and societal benefits from a diverse student body…”  Really?  What “facts” are those?