The Case Against Racial ‘Balancing’ Schemes
The editorial “A Different Race Case” argued that Seattle’s use of race in assigning students to schools should be upheld by the Supreme Court because they “use race in a fashion quite different from” past affirmative action plans.But the differences cut against Seattle, not in its favor. The city’s schools have never been segregated and would be diverse without using race as a factor in enrollment decisions.
You praise U.S. Appeals Court Judge Alex Kozinski for ruling in support of Seattle. But his concurring opinion was based on a mistake: He claimed that Seattle was seeking to achieve an integrated “melting pot.” In fact, the Seattle schools publicly denounce “concepts such as a melting pot” as failures on the school system’s Web site. They have treated students as members of competing racial groups rather than as individuals, claiming that “individualism” is a form of “cultural racism.” They also engage in offensive racial stereotyping, claiming that planning (“future time orientation”) is a white characteristic that is racist to expect minorities to exhibit.