Biden’s DOJ seeks Supreme Court’s approval for race-based admissions at West Point
The Biden Administration Defends Affirmative Action at West Point
The Biden administration has responded to a request by a student group seeking to block race-based admissions practices at the U.S. Military Academy, urging the Supreme Court not to interfere with affirmative action policies at the school. U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar argued that a diverse officer corps is crucial for an effective fighting force and that limited consideration of race is necessary in selecting cadets at West Point.
“For more than forty years, our Nation’s military leaders have determined that a diverse Army officer corps is a national-security imperative and that achieving that diversity requires limited consideration of race in selecting those who join the Army as cadets at the United States Military Academy at West Point,” Prelogar wrote.
The government’s response comes after Students For Fair Admissions (SFFA), the group that successfully challenged affirmative action in college applications last year, requested the Supreme Court to block West Point from considering race in its admissions process. SFFA argued that military academies should follow the same standard set by the Court in its decision against Harvard University’s race-based practices.
SFFA’s request comes as the application deadline for West Point’s class of 2028 approaches. The group claimed that the dispute should be resolved before the deadline.
“West Point awards preferences to only three races: blacks, Hispanics, and Native Americans,” the group’s petition said. “They cannot use race as a negative, lack an endpoint, stereotype, deploy arbitrary categories, or pursue interests that courts can’t reliably measure.”
SFFA previously went to federal court in New York, seeking to temporarily block West Point from considering race during the litigation process. However, their request was denied by U.S. District Judge Philip Halpern, who stated that SFFA was attempting to fundamentally change an admissions process that has been in place for decades.
Prelogar argued that SFFA’s petition heavily relies on the Court’s decision in the Harvard case and ignores the distinct interests that military academies present. The Supreme Court’s ruling on affirmative action in academia did not address military academies, as noted in a footnote in the opinion.
Since SFFA’s victory at the Supreme Court, conservative legal groups have argued that the ruling extends beyond academia and should be applied to other policies, such as corporate diversity and inclusion efforts.
SFFA, led by conservative legal strategist Edward Blum, is also challenging affirmative action policies at the U.S. Naval Academy. However, their temporary request to bar the Naval Academy from using race-based admissions was denied by U.S. District Judge Richard Bennett.
The Washington Examiner has reached out to Edward Blum for comment.
Does affirmative action perpetuate discrimination by considering race as a factor in college admissions, or is it necessary to address historical disparities and create a fair and inclusive society?
Ar, petitioned the Supreme Court to hear their case challenging race-based admissions at West Point. SFFA argues that considering race during the admissions process is unconstitutional and that it undermines the principles of meritocracy and equal treatment. They claim that race-blind admissions should be the standard for all educational institutions, including military academies.
However, the Biden administration disagrees with this stance, asserting that diversity and inclusivity are essential components of a strong and effective military. Solicitor General Prelogar emphasized the longstanding belief within military leadership that a diverse officer corps is crucial for national security. She argued that limited consideration of race in the admissions process at West Point is necessary to achieve this diversity.
The government’s defense of affirmative action at West Point aligns with President Biden’s commitment to promoting diversity and equity throughout American institutions. The administration has made it clear that it views affirmative action as a tool to address historical inequalities and ensure equal opportunities for all.
Opponents of affirmative action argue that it perpetuates discrimination by considering race as a factor in college admissions. They assert that merit should be the sole criterion for admission, regardless of race or ethnicity. However, supporters of affirmative action contend that considering race is necessary to address historical disparities and create a fair and inclusive society.
In the case of West Point, the government argues that the consideration of race is vital to ensuring a diverse officer corps that can effectively navigate the complexities of a diverse world. Given the military’s mission of protecting the nation’s interests both domestically and internationally, diversity within its ranks is seen as an asset rather than a detriment.
While the Supreme Court has previously ruled on cases related to affirmative action in college admissions, this particular case involving West Point brings a unique perspective. Military academies serve a specific purpose of training officers to lead and defend the country. As such, their admissions policies may necessitate different considerations compared to civilian educational institutions.
The outcome of this case could have significant implications for future admissions policies at West Point and potentially other military academies. Should the Supreme Court decide to hear the case, it will be crucial to balance the constitutional rights of applicants with the broader goals of creating a diverse and capable military force.
In conclusion, the Biden administration’s defense of affirmative action at West Point underscores its commitment to diversity, equity, and national security. The government argues that limited consideration of race is necessary to ensure a diverse officer corps that can effectively fulfill its mission. As this case unfolds, it will provide insight into how the Supreme Court interprets the intersection of affirmative action and the unique requirements of military academies.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
