Should Affirmative Action End?
Jason Riley and Paul Frymer debate affirmative action and the Supreme Court.
Princeton University professor Jason Frymer and Wall Street Journal columnist Jason Riley debate the resolution, "The U.S. Supreme Court's 2023 decision to dismantle affirmative action in American higher education marked a significant regression in the pursuit of racial equality."
Arguing for the affirmative is Frymer, a professor of politics at Princeton. He's the author of Uneasy Alliances: Race and Party Competition in America and Black and Blue: African Americans, the Labor Movement, and the Decline of the Democratic Party.
Arguing against the resolution is Riley, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute. He's also the author of several relevant titles, including The Affirmative Action Myth: Why Blacks Don't Need Racial Preferences To Succeed and Please Stop Helping Us: How Liberals Make It Harder for Blacks to Succeed, False Black Power.
The debate is moderated by Soho Forum director Gene Epstein.
- Post Production Supervision: John Osterhoudt
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please to post comments
Yes
Yes
Yes, institutionalized requirements making hiring decisions in whole or in part based on race or sex should end. If it is not ended, the the influence of Nick Fuentes and his ilk will be boosted.
In all circumstances? Woman's spa needs to hire male waxers? Black lesbian bar has to hire straight white male bartenders?
Private businesses can (or should be able to) hire based on whatever they want.
Sure but I doubt there's a big customer demand for male bikini waxers. If that's the case I'd like to submit a resume.
No, the 14th Amendment is about race only. Leave sex out of the legal analysis. If you want to drag sex discrimination in as some kind moral evil, then creech is right; you're begging for men in women's sports, bathrooms, and lives.
Affirmative action is based on race, it is racist by definition, and is just another example of amending the Constitution by reinterpretation.
And even if there wasn't Fuentes and his ilk, it would still be wrong, racist and counterproductive.
Inconvenient truth:
"affirmative action" is racism.
Libertarian answer: it should never have existed.
Whoa there buddy. Only jeffsarc and select others have been issued the decoder for libertarian answers.
BE-SURE-TO-DRINK-YOUR-KOCHVALTINE
Obviously yes. It's one of the biggest no-brainers out there.
Short answer: yes.
If ever there were a topic that needs no debate it's this one. But kudos to Reason for remaining irrelevant.
The U.S. Supreme Court's 2023 decision to dismantle affirmative action in American higher education marked a significant regression in the pursuit of racial equality.
Interesting phraseology. It paints the SFFA v. Harvard decision in a negative light. Why not word the resolution as saying the decision "marked a significant progression in the pursuit of racial equality"?