OPINION: This article may contain commentary which reflects the author's opinion.
The Daily Wire host Candace Owens responded to the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling on Thursday striking down race-based college admission standards as unconstitutional.
The nation’s highest court ruled 6-2 that race-based admissions programs at Harvard violated Title VI of the Civil Rights Act and 6-3 that the University of North Carolina violated the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson recused herself from the Harvard case because she graduated from the Ivy League college and served on its board.
In a tweet, Owens noted: “Wow!! Affirmative action, something I have spoken out against for the last 7 years, has FINALLY been struck down in a historic Supreme Court ruling. This is a MAJOR WIN in the strive for racial equality, removing the bigotry of low expectations against black students while permitting Asian and white Americans an EQUAL chance to be rewarded for their hard work. RACE should never be a factor in deciding whether or not you are qualified for anything.”
“It’s a shame it took this long, but finally— justice wins!” she noted further, adding: “Make America a meritocracy again.”
Wow!! Affirmative action, something I have spoken out against for the last 7 years, has FINALLY been struck down in a historic Supreme Court ruling.
This is a MAJOR WIN in the strive for racial equality, removing the bigotry of low expectations against black students, while…
— Candace Owens (@RealCandaceO) June 29, 2023
Owens has long advocated against race-based admission standards, arguing that they are both illegal and unconstitutional. Recently, she went viral online for speaking out against them during an episode of Dr. Phil.
“The policies are harmful also to the people they purport to help, and we have all of the evidence there to look at,” she said during the program. “These policies have never helped black Americans; it’s, just, basically, policies that are put in place to make people feel good.”
Chief Justice John Roberts, who authored the majority opinion, wrote, “Many universities have for too long wrongly concluded that the touchstone of an individual’s identity is not challenges bested, skills built, or lessons learned, but the color of their skin. Eliminating racial discrimination means eliminating all of it.”
“Nothing in this opinion should be construed as prohibiting universities from considering an applicant’s discussion of how race affected his or her life, be it through discrimination, inspiration, or otherwise. But, despite the dissent’s assertion to the contrary, universities may not simply establish through application essays or other means the regime we hold unlawful today,” the opinion noted further.
In a concurring opinion, Justice Clarence Thomas, who grew up during the Jim Crow era, wrote that Jackson, in her dissent, attempts to link “the legacy of slavery and the nature of inherited wealth” to disproportionately negative socioeconomic outcomes for blacks in America.
“This, she claims, locks blacks into a seemingly perpetual inferior caste. Such a view is irrational; it is an insult to individual achievement and cancerous to young minds seeking to push through barriers, rather than consign themselves to permanent victimhood,” he wrote in his opinion.
Thomas went on to not black achievements in the country and dismissed Jackson’s “race-based worldview” that is held by most Democrats.
“Individuals are the sum of their unique experiences, challenges, and accomplishments. What matters is not the barriers they face, but how they choose to confront them,” he wrote.
Though he acknowledged “social and economic ravages” in the past that plagued black Americans, he went on to share his belief that the country will “live up to its principles” of a colorblind society following the ruling.
The use of race when considering college admissions — while appearing patently unconstitutional on its face — had been in practice since the civil rights movement of the 1960s. The court’s six conservative-leaning justices ruled that the practice is a violation of the 14th Amendment’s equal protection clause.
