The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.
“OPPOSING TRUMP ADMINISTRATION'S ATTACK ON AFFIRMATIVE ACTION IN HIGHER EDUCATION” mentioning the U.S. Dept. of Justice was published in the Extensions of Remarks section on pages E1119 on Aug. 4, 2017.
The Department is one of the oldest in the US, focused primarily on law enforcement and the federal prison system. Downsizing the Federal Government, a project aimed at lowering taxes and boosting federal efficiency, detailed wasteful expenses such as $16 muffins at conferences and board meetings.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
OPPOSING TRUMP ADMINISTRATION'S ATTACK ON AFFIRMATIVE ACTION IN HIGHER
EDUCATION
______
HON. SHEILA JACKSON LEE
of texas
in the house of representatives
Friday, August 4, 2017
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, in less than one week, the Trump Administration has managed to level a double blow to the fight against discrimination faced by minority groups in our country.
Yesterday, the Trump Justice Department, currently headed by Attorney General Jeff Session, announced plans to redirect departmental resources toward investigating and suing universities over their affirmative action admissions policies.
Mr. Speaker, this preemptive attack on higher education affirmative action programs, if fully implemented, will deny educational opportunities to millions of deserving students from underrepresented communities and hamper America's ability to compete and win in an increasingly complex, competitive, multicultural global economy.
Not only does the announcement by the Justice Department threatens to undo decades of progress in trying to ensure that every child in America--regardless of race or ethnicity--has an equal opportunity to succeed, but it is directly contrary to long line of judicial precedent upholding the use of race-conscious affirmative action programs that are narrowly drawn and administered to achieve diversity in higher education.
It was only a year ago that the Supreme Court, in Fisher v. University of Texas, No. 14-981, 579 U.S. __ (2016), affirmed that the admissions policy of the University of Texas at Austin complied with the principles established in Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 306
(2003), which held that ``obtaining the educational benefits of student body diversity is a compelling state interest that can justify the use of race in university admissions.''
Mr. Speaker, as the Member of Congress for the Eighteenth Congressional District of Texas, I am proud to be a representative from a state that has played a pivotal role in the nation's educational equity jurisprudence, beginning with the landmark case of Sweatt v. Painter, 339 U.S. 629 (1950), won by Thurgood Marshall and which held that segregated law schools violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and laid the foundation for the landmark decision in Brown v. Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483 (1954), which prohibited racial segregation in all schools.
Affirmative action is needed to ensure diversity on college campuses which will yield diversity in the ranks of America's future leaders.
In a globalized and increasingly interconnected world, the nation that succeeds is the one best positioned to adapt to a world of differences--cultural, religious, economic, social, racial, and political.
The key to success in a diverse global economy is learning to adapt and thrive in diverse communities where the next generation and its leaders are educated and trained.
That is why it is truly appalling that the Sessions-led Department of Justice is seeking to undermine the principles established in Grutter v. Bollinger: that diversity in higher education is such a compelling governmental interest that race-conscious admission policies are permissible if other alternatives are found to be inadequate.
Mr. Speaker, we have seen before the effects of university admissions policies that do not address racial disparities in access to higher education.
From 1997 to 2004, affirmative action in admissions at the University of Texas was barred by the infamous Fifth Circuit decision in Hopwood v. Texas, 78 F.3d 932 (5th. Cir. 1996).
As a result of the University of Texas's inability to consider a qualified applicant's race in the admissions process, between 1997 and 2004 African-American students never comprised more than 4.5 percent the entering class--far below the 13 percent of Texas high school graduates who are African Americans.
Worse yet, for the students attending the University of Texas during that period, 4 out of every 5 of classes (79 percent) at the University had zero, or only one, African-American student.
It should go without saying that these are not statistics we would like to see repeated, nor is this any way to produce a generation of American leaders for the 21st century.
Affirmative action works; it is the right thing to do for our country.
Fostering educational diversity and greater opportunity is critical to our nation's future in a global economy and an increasingly interconnected world.
That is why diversity is supported by a broad cross-section of American society, including military leaders, major corporations, small business owners, educators, and students from all backgrounds.
An America that celebrates diversity in higher education will produce the leaders, inventors, entrepreneurs, diplomats, public servants, and teachers that will serve our nation well in the global economy of the 21st century.
We must stand loudly and unequivocally against any effort made by this Administration to subvert the progress we have made in guaranteeing every American student, regardless of race, ethnicity, religion or other immutable characteristics, access to higher education and in positioning our country to compete and win in the global economy of the 21st century.
____________________
