Lawyers vs. Equal Protection

In his landmark 6–3 majority opinion in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, striking down affirmative action, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote, “Eliminating racial discrimination means eliminating all of it.” In response to this ruling, law firms across America should have begun reforming their “Diversity, Equity, Inclusion” (DEI) programs while urging their clients to do the same. Unfortunately, those who should be the most familiar with our civil-rights laws and the Constitution are among their most flagrant violators.

Although the case focused on colleges and universities, the ruling has crucial implications for civil-rights statutes that govern all private-sector employers. Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, for example, prohibits recipients of federal funds from discriminating based on race, while Title VII prohibits private employers from hiring based on race. Through these two provisions of federal law, the court’s findings in Students for Fair Admissions also likely prohibit affirmative-action hiring and promotion in addition to affirmative-action admission.

About the Author

Tom Cotton

Tom Cotton represents Arkansas in the U.S. Senate.

Featured Tags

In his landmark 6–3 majority opinion in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, striking down affirmative action, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote, “Eliminating racial discrimination means eliminating all of it.” In response to this ruling, law firms across America should have begun reforming their “Diversity, Equity, Inclusion” (DEI) programs while urging their clients to do the same. Unfortunately, those who should be the most familiar with our civil-rights laws and the Constitution are among their most flagrant violators.

Although the case focused on colleges and universities, the ruling has crucial implications for civil-rights statutes that govern all private-sector employers. Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, for example, prohibits recipients of federal funds from discriminating based on race, while Title VII prohibits private employers from hiring based on race. Through these two provisions of federal law, the court’s findings in Students for Fair Admissions also likely prohibit affirmative-action hiring and promotion in addition to affirmative-action admission.