Why the Affirmative Action Decision Might Not Matter

One reason that the Supreme Court’s decision ending race-based preferences in university admissions probably will be less significant than it might seem is that, for the vast majority of college applicants, it simply won’t matter much. That’s because most colleges accept most of those who apply. It’s only a relative handful of schools that are highly selective.

As columnist Cynthia Tucker wrote, “That group includes, of course, the Ivy League, which educates many of the leaders who end up controlling important government and commercial institutions. That’s why there is such controversy over admissions to those schools.”

But it’s that casual reference to a small group of schools that educate many of our leaders that I want to explore today. Tucker’s statement was not uncommon. I noticed several commentators and editorials reference Ivy League schools as “gatekeepers” either using that very word or words like it. They’d note that and move on as if that’s just the way it is. Nothing more to see here.

Actually, I think that’s the central point and it would be the main problem. It would not be okay if, of 1,364 colleges and universities, about a dozen dominated leadership positions in government, media and business.

But it’s not clear that that assumption is correct. It’s certainly true at the Supreme Court itself. There is no body in greater need of alma mater-based affirmative action than SCOTUS. Only one of the nine justices didn’t go to Harvard or Yale. Amy Coney Barrett graduated from Notre Dame. But before she joined the court, Harvard or Yale was the alma mater of all nine justices. Though Ruth Bader Ginsburg got her law degree from Columbia, she went to Harvard as an undergrad.

So, two schools certainly dominate the high court, but what about Congress? Not so much. Harvard does have more grads in the House than any other school, but it’s only 10 out of 435. In fact, of the top ten schools represented in that chamber six are public universities. The UW Madison ranks 11th.

What about the top job in the country? Six of the last 12 presidents went to Ivy League schools. (I count Trump among them. He went to Fordham and the Wharton School. Not first tier Ivys like Harvard, Yale and Princeton, but close enough.)

What about top business executives? Depends on how you look at it. Of the CEO’s of Fortune 500 companies, 135 by my count, went to Ivy League schools and Harvard had the most with 41. But, like Congress, more CEO’s went to state schools than private universities. So it’s fair to conclude that while the Ivy’s had an outsized representation, it’s also not overwhelming.

And then, of course, you need to take into account actual merit. If you got into a school that accepts less than 5% of its applicants, chances are you’re a pretty bright person. It’s hard to say how much of your future success can be attributed to what you learned in college and the contacts you made there and how much was going to happen regardless of where you went to school.

I suppose if we were able to dig deeper into, say, congressional and White House staffs, editors and reporters at NPR, the New York Times and other influential news outlets and the publishing industry, we might find more influence from the most selective schools. But at least my quick look at easily available data doesn’t provide overwhelming evidence to back up the conclusion that Harvard, et. al., are the “gatekeepers” to power in America — though they certainly do hold the keys to the Supreme Court chamber. Beyond the high court, it might be more accurate to say that the gate is left slightly ajar for their grads.

And if the gatekeeper meme is not true then much of the angst over the Court’s decision on affirmative action would appear to be misplaced. What’s more concerning is the casual acceptance of the idea that if it were true it would be okay.