The Opportunity From Overturning Affirmative Action into US Top Universities

In the United States, most top universities use race as a factor as they decide who makes the admission cut. They call it affirmative action, and I hate it even as I vigorously support a variant So, the Supreme Court ruling today is a draw: “The Supreme Court has ruled against the use of race as a factor in higher education admissions. The 6-3 decision will force colleges to scrap affirmative action policies designed to increase minority representation on campus.”

First, why I hate it: it makes extremely accomplished African Americans to be perceived as being less competent before their White counterparts. As a student in Johns Hopkins University, in my first year, I was the ONLY black student in the electrical & computer engineering department PhD program, and one of two in the whole school of engineering PhD program. By default, many will think this student possibly made it because of affirmative action. And one student did say that, and I took time and provided my records.

I explained to the student that I did not know how I came here – affirmative action or not – but happy that someone is spending close to $100,000 per year (I was paid $36,000 yearly and my tuition was $55,000 yearly) on my education in a foreign land. But note this: in my master’s degree, I had 4.00/4.00 and in GRE Quantitative, I scored 800/800 (top 0.01% in the world). So, if someone after my stellar records did not admit me on merit, that person was not fair to me. The student apologized. And I graduated on time, wrote a book which won an award, filed and received a US patent and excelled. (That student spent 7 years and dropped out.)

Yes, if you have 100 students and 5 black kids need affirmative action to get in, it may be good to check on graduation day if they came last in the class. If they do not, it means the system was faulty at the admission phase since those who need help most times are not the bottom of the class on graduation day. If Obama had needed affirmative action to enter Harvard Law, the system was unbalanced for him in the admission phase, as he finished among the top of his class.

In other words, most affirmative action students do not graduate bottom of their classes, which indicates that the admission process is not effective for them to have needed help to get in. And by using the policy, it makes universities lazy, masking necessary improvements which could have deepened the admission process for minority students.

Then I am happy that affirmative action is gone: Affirmative action is unfair to many hard working middle class minority families.  This system allows universities to check “Black” and onload black students from wealthy families who do not need any help. In other words, Obama’s kids could qualify even though the kids have access most white kids do not have. But being black, some schools can admit them to have the right statistics. So, at the end, most beneficiaries at the undergraduate level are children of wealthy black kids who do not need that help, as they’re well positioned to compete at the highest level.

The Supreme Court has ruled against the use of race as a factor in higher education admissions. The 6-3 decision will force colleges to scrap affirmative action policies designed to increase minority representation on campus. Schools must now “decide where racial diversity ranks among priorities that can include academic performance, achievement in extracurricular activities … and preferences for alumni and donors,” The Wall Street Journal notes. While expected, the ruling is a reversal from the court’s last big decision on the subject, which in 2016 reaffirmed the use of racial preferences in public university admissions. (LinkedIn News)

So where do I stand? I want universities to use economic status, and not race, to make that admission decision. Yes, affirmative action on economic status. The probability that many black kids from families which need help will get into top US universities is closer to “1” if economic status is the core metric, over race. We may not like the Supreme Court ruling, but if you check the data of black kids in leading top universities, you will look at this ruling from a different angle.

This ruling is an opportunity for aspiring minority families!

Comment on Feed

Comment 1: I believe this affirmative action is close to our quota system policies which have not allowed qualified individual to access most government opportunities.

Comment 2: Prof., does this in any way discount the underrepresentation of black minorities in academics? School enrollment is already positively correlated to increasing household income (a key indicator of wealth). And data is consistent in showing that black families remain poorer with a widened income gap.

University policies already factor economic status in admission, especially given that first generation students (who have been consistently shown to come from poorer families) are given preferential treatment.

I’m overly concerned on the impact that this ruling will make to advance arguments in favour of reverse racism and how proponents will capitalise this ruling to undermine equity and social justice across other sectors, and not just university admissions.

My Response: If you do not have many black students, you will not have many black professors. It is a pipeline issue. The issue here is that everyone is a victim. Asian students which started the campaign already have more students per capita when benchmarked with their percentage in the full population in the US. Yet, while they excel in school, they have minimal impact in US politics. 

So, what happens is that the US is an interesting country, considering that the Supreme Court excluded military schools from this ruling (yes, they should use race even though Harvard cannot).

Having Obama, Kamala as President and VP will mask many things in America as the Asian kid will ask: this race has reached a level we have never reached, why do they need help? I think economic affirmative action, over race, is a better metric. Most schools will adopt that going forward.

Comment 3: Yes, prof Ndubuisi Ekekwe, it’s a more objective and “less” socially-sensitive criterion than race in today’s uber-conscious world. That said, it comes with its own challenges, too.

Interestingly, per your story, I had a similar experience at UNILAG regarding the controversial Nigerian quota system (on which I think I have read an article of yours calling for a change there as well). I am from Gombe State. So, naturally, anyone seeing a Gombe student in UNILAG would be forgiven to think that the student came in per quota (= low scores). My HOD in year 1 had such a bias when he blatantly refused to sign my admission papers for weeks, even with my good JAMB scores & WAEC. He said northen students struggled in accounting. He said anyone could get high scores in those exams, so, they meant nothing to him. Well, I topped not just my class, but the entire faculty, from the very first semester to the last. I was just 1 step short of leaving as best overall in the entire school. Prof Eddy Omolehinwa avoided me for 4yrs. He just couldnt swallow his ego. That’s part of the unintended consequences (like the rich black kids you mentioned) that such dysfunctional classification systems can engender…

My Response: .This is the story of Nigeria and extremely profound. Just like these things create opportunities, they also diminish as your case. Think of two kids in a primary school in Lagos; one from Zamfara and another from Imo. Both write exams to enter a federal government college. Imo has 150 but cannot get in while the Zamfara kid has 10 and makes the cut. Forever, the Imo kid cannot understand Nigeria.

Register for Tekedia Mini-MBA (Feb 10 - May 3, 2025), and join Prof Ndubuisi Ekekwe and our global faculty; click here.