An Unequal and Unlevel Playing Field: Critically Examining the Race-Conscious Affirmative Action Legal Debate in Higher Education Through the Eyes of the Council on Legal Education Opportunity (CLEO)

Race relations in the United States have a tumultuous and painful history. The current legal battles over race-conscious affirmative action policies simply add more fuel to the fire and rekindle centuries-old racial conflicts and biases amongst many Americans. Some researchers are concerned that the current never-ending legal battles are being used to eliminate race-conscious education programs and destroy the original intent of affirmative action policies to equalize opportunities between Blacks and Whites alike. Researchers fear that the policies will be eradicated before the playing field has been leveled. This study critically examined how the race-conscious affirmative action legal debate in higher education has evolved from the implementation of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 until 2006. The researcher used two constructs of critical race theory - interest convergence and whiteness as property - to guide the study in the examination and analysis of federal race-conscious legal cases in higher education and state anti-affirmative action policies. The researcher evaluated whether the evolution of the legal debates supports white privilege. Additionally, the researcher used case study methodology to investigate whether the legal debates relate to changes in a specific race-based legal education program, the CLEO program. The researcher analyzed multiple sources of evidence inclusive of both qualitative and quantitative data. The findings in this study indicate that more reverse discrimination lawsuits are saturating the legal landscape and include multiple White plaintiffs. Concurrently, CLEO, which has assisted underrepresented racial minorities with entering and graduating law school, has experienced significant changes to its funding, programs, and the racial/ethnic and academic profiles of its students. The data support a correlation between the race-conscious affirmative action legal debates for more than 30 years, and the significant changes in CLEO's funding, the types of programs offered, and the types of students served. The findings show that an unequal and unlevel academic playing field still exists, yet the race-conscious affirmative action legal debate in higher education will continue until all policies and programs are annihilated. The findings also suggest that the evolution of legal cases and anti-affirmative action policies support the maintenance of white privilege in American society