Affirmative Action unconstitutional ruling!

Today I will post about the story of Affirmative Action, which was ruled unconstitutional in 2023. I will try to find out if the college admission door has widened for Asian students due to the unconstitutional ruling of Affirmative Action.

Affirmative Action On June 29, 2023, Affirmative Action, which gives benefits to blacks or Hispanics by applying different standards in the US college entrance exam, was ruled unconstitutional. Affirmative Action Minority group preferential policy

The court ruled that the use of racial information in US college admissions should be prohibited.

Then what is Affirmative Action? Positive Discrimination, also known as this policy, is It is to distinguish groups by gender or economic criteria and apply different standards to them to judge whether they are admitted to college. In the US, it is mostly applied to blacks or Hispanics, and it is a policy that favors them.

Edward Blum, a legal strategist who leads Student for Fair Admissions, It started with suing Harvard and UNC, and On 6/29, Affirmative Action was finally ruled unconstitutional. With this ruling, a standard was created that would not discriminate on the basis of race in the college admission process, but judge on other factors, and not give benefits to specific races.

The background that led to this result was that when Trump took office, he appointed many conservative members to the Supreme Court, and six conservatives agreed that it was unconstitutional, resulting in an unconstitutional verdict. But President Biden says he needs to review this ruling again. Conservative politicians may see it as a natural result because they lack tolerance for minorities.

Impact on Asian students We need to think about whether this ruling will work in favor of Asian, and Korean students. UNC, the representative of public schools, and Harvard, the representative of drawer schools, received this ruling, so maybe it could be a big deal. To predict what kind of impact there will be, we need to look at California, where similar things have already happened.

In the UC system where California schools are located, there was a ruling in 1998 that abolished the policy of giving special favors to minorities. So if you look at the situation in California, you can predict the situation after Affirmative Action was abolished by the unconstitutional ruling in 2023.

You have written a very informative and detailed text about the impact of Affirmative Action on Asian students in the US. I can help you improve your text by checking the grammar, spelling, and punctuation, as well as suggesting some rephrasing and editing. Here is the revised version of your text:

The table from the UC system shows the following:

The proportion of Hispanic and black students decreased after the 1998 bill took effect.

The proportion of Hispanics and blacks enrolled in local colleges dropped compared to the proportion of Hispanics and blacks living in the area.

However, what we are going to look at is “Did more Asian students get selected after the bill was proposed in California?” Did more Asian students get selected after the 1998 bill took effect in California?

The table above shows the number of students by race in a few states after Affirmative Action was banned in 2021. Did they select more whites or Asians while selecting fewer blacks or Hispanics? We can see that the number of Asians and whites increased, but the trap of this table is that it is a very short period.

So let’s look at the next table, the UC freshman race graph. The data of selective UC schools such as UCLA and UC Berkeley within the UC system are on the left, and the data of the rest of the UC schools are on the right. We will look at what changes have occurred in the Asian group after the 1998 bill was proposed. The fact is that there is no significant change before and after 1998. Hispanics decreased until 1998 and there was no big change after that, and Asians increased and there was no big change from the 1998 point. The rest of the UC schools on the right also have no big changes. In other words, after the bill was proposed to ban giving preferences by race, there may be some short-term effects, but when we analyzed the graph for 10 years, we could not see any significant changes by race.

After the 1998 bill was proposed, the UC system, which has been over 20 years since the 1998 bill was proposed, The current UCLA vice president said in 2026 about the Affirmative Action unconstitutional ruling, “It was not a very good solution.” He evaluated that he failed to secure fairness and diversity even though he spent a large budget. He said in an interview that he tried to do it intentionally at first because he had to watch the government and various situations, but In the end, it remained at a similar rate as before.

Even if you look at the table above that shows the trend of Asian students enrolling in UC schools, There was no surge in the number of Asian students based on 1998, and overall it gradually increased. However, the reason for this increase is not because of the 1998 bill, but because the Asian population in California increased.

The next table shows the residence ratio and college enrollment percentage of Hispanics and blacks. The closer the two lines (dotted and solid) are, the more Hispanics and blacks are selected, and The farther the two lines (dotted and solid) are, the fewer Hispanics and blacks are selected.

UC Berkeley - Farther after 1998 -> Decrease of Hispanics/blacks. UCLA - Farther after 1998 -> Decrease of Hispanics/blacks. University of Texas - No difference after the 1998 bill took effect, so Affirmative Action was applied again. Texas A&M also has no big difference. You can see that the number of Hispanic or black students before and after the bill took effect is similar. Florida/ Michigan/ Washington also have no significant changes in the number of Hispanic or black students.

The recently appointed Harvard president, Claudine Gay, talked about the unconstitutional ruling of Affirmative Action. Of course, she said she would follow the Supreme Court’s ruling, but Harvard could not give up on diversity and would strive to build a diverse intellectual community. She said that she would have to take less account of racial factors but maintain diversity as it is. She said that she would not select students only by something special, such as grades or other outstanding things, but by considering many things in other areas to maintain diversity. For Korean students, they had to compete with each other within a fixed Asian quota, so they prepared for college entrance with high standards. Due to the unconstitutional ruling of Affirmative Action, Asian students may be selected more for a year or two, but they will eventually be similar to the present as they will select students by considering various other conditions (regional factors, low-wage support factors, financial situation). You should be careful not to apply too high by expecting that Affirmative Action will ban and select more Asian students.

I will give you one example of why diversity cannot be given up in the US. There was a well-known energy company called ENRON. It was a company that was ranked first among the influential companies by Fortune magazine for more than six years. This company ignored diversity, hired only highly educated employees, and focused only on work performance. As a result, the competition among employees intensified, and they inflated their performance and eventually collapsed due to the problems of the top executives and false accounting. Even if you look at this example, if diversity is ignored, unexpected problems may arise, so the US will try to maintain diversity. Therefore, it would be better not to have vain expectations that the unconstitutional ruling of Affirmative Action will not give much benefit to Asian and Korean students. You can refer to the YouTube channel to see why US colleges value diversity and what preparations you need to make to fit in with diversity. I will bring you more stories in the next posting. Thank you!