California's Controversial College Admissions Bill
California's legislature has passed a bill through one house that would allow colleges and universities to give preference in admissions to descendants of slavery. Assembly Bill 7 (AB7), authored by Assemblyman Isaac Bryant, has sparked significant debate about the practicality and legality of such measures.
The Bill's Framework
AB7 would permit (but not require) California colleges and universities to provide admissions preferences to students who are descendants of enslaved people. The bill cleared the Senate Education Committee with a 5-2 vote and has received backing from nearly two dozen organizations, including teachers unions and student associations.
Fundamental Implementation Challenges
The proposal raises several critical questions about execution:
Verification Issues: How would institutions determine who qualifies as a descendant of slavery? Would this rely on self-reporting, genetic testing, or documentation? The practical challenges of proving ancestral slavery status appear substantial.
Definitional Ambiguity: The bill doesn't clearly define what percentage of ancestry would qualify someone for preference, nor does it address mixed-race individuals or those descended from freed blacks who were never enslaved.
Geographic Considerations: Since California was never a slave state, the bill would primarily benefit families who migrated from former slave states, raising questions about fairness to other groups.
Legal and Constitutional Concerns
The timing of this bill is particularly notable given recent Supreme Court rulings against race-based admissions preferences. While proponents argue that ancestry-based preferences differ from race-based ones, legal experts question whether this distinction would hold up in court.
Existing lawsuits from Asian American students already challenge university admissions practices, and this bill would likely face immediate legal challenges if implemented.
Alternative Approaches
Rather than changing admissions criteria, some education advocates suggest focusing on improving educational outcomes through community-based programs and addressing cultural factors that may impact student performance. This approach emphasizes opportunity creation over preference-based solutions.
California voters have previously rejected race-based preferences in multiple referendums, suggesting public skepticism about such policies. The bill's passage through committee occurred despite limited public testimony or media coverage.
Even supporters acknowledge the bill faces significant hurdles and may have been introduced primarily to make a statement rather than become law. As it moves to the judiciary committee, the debate over its constitutionality and practicality will likely intensify.
The fundamental question remains: Is there a way to address historical injustices in education without running afoul of current legal precedents or creating new inequities? California's experiment with AB7 may provide some answers, though the path forward appears fraught with challenges.
Need Help?