Out of all the broadcasted sports in the United States, the NBA (National Basketball Association) has one of the largest fan base, greatly due to the vast number of talented players in the league. Because of the extremely competitive nature of the league, only 0.03% of all high school basketball players end up in the NBA, leaving no room for under-qualified athletes. Due to factors such as the environment players grew up in and their physical build up, this sport favors African Americans, who constitute a whopping 72% of all the races in the NBA. However, racial policies such as affirmative action lead to a question: Is it acceptable to limit the number of African American players just to increase racial diversity? To this day, the debate on affirmative action in college admissions continues to question if affirmative action truly alleviates racial discrimination or ironically, leads to more prejudices of race. Comparing the NBA draft to college admissions, affirmative action in higher education would be equivalent to limiting the number of adroit African Americans in the NBA just to increase racial diversity, a change that would be undoubtedly criticized as nonsense. Based on personal stories, professional analysis, and data, it is evident that affirmative action in higher education by race leads to discrimination against qualified students of overrepresented races and increased failure of under-qualified students of the minor race, ultimately proving the policy ineffective in increasing racial diversity on college campuses.

Affirmative action unfairly eliminates qualified and highly represented students in college admissions, leading to unjust decisions. This policy leads to an essential question: Why should an under-qualified student of a minor race displace an academically qualified student of a highly represented race? Even if the qualified student is under worse social and economic circumstances, the factor that plays the most significant role in college admissions is race. This question epitomizes the whole picture and standardization of affirmative action at large. Further data on Insider Higher Ed’s database shows that “an Asian scoring a 1550 out of 1600 on the old SAT is given the same consideration as a Caucasian student scoring 1410, a Hispanic student scoring 1230, and an African-American student scoring 1100.” Although one race might be more academically qualified than the other, prestigious universities highly value the mediocre minority student just because they want to increase diversity on their campus. Universities are places of extremely rigorous education; and acceptance to a prestigious university serves as a reward for students who put in hard work and can possibly lead to a prominent future. Limiting one student’s chance over the other just because of race and “diversity” is biased and does not reward the harder working student. Although prejudices may seem subtle because minorities are favored, this racial profiling and admission process is undeniably racist. By stating that minorities need lower standards than represented races, the government is essentially making the minorities educationally inferior. In addition, diligent students of highly represented races are often extremely discouraged when they discover the reality that they will not be accepted to a top college, not because of lack of qualifications, but because of race. Many of these students develop extremely strong work ethic and aspire to attend prestigious universities only to find out that people working and trying less than them are more likely to make it to the college of their dreams. This harsh reality psychologically damages students and their attitudes about universities and the future, making them less motivated.

In addition, affirmative action harms underrepresented minorities by overwhelming them in highly competitive environments and by making it difficult to find employment after college. By accepting under qualified students of the minor races, colleges are jeopardizing their futures and their confidence. Many underrepresented students on prestigious universities struggle immensely with the academically rigorous environments and end up not being able to graduate. In addition, under qualified students feel undeserving of their acceptance in these colleges after they see their classmates and school curriculum, leaving a great psychological devastation. Students have a hard time adjusting and they end up moving down to community colleges or staying in that college for an extended amount of time, increasing the financial burden. In “It’s Time to Change Affirmative Action in Colleges,” Clarence Thomas, an African African Yale Alumni and Supreme Court justice reveals that he “struggled to find a job as a lawyer after graduation. Wherever he applied, people doubted his grades and success, attributing only to affirmative action.” Like Clarence Thomas, many underrepresented graduates are discredited for their work in colleges and are discriminated against in the workforce just because of the repercussions of affirmative action. Although affirmative action may increase diversity in college, minorities are discriminated to a greater degree after college. The existence of affirmative action unwillingly directs employers to believe that an underrepresented student was leniently accepted to a prestigious college, a presuming belief that totally discredits the works of the student. In the end, affirmative action proves more detrimental to minorities than helpful.

The main goal of affirmative action is to increase racial diversity. Ironically, affirmative action in college admissions has led to more segregation of races on the college campus and unchanging racial diversity.  Even after the enforcement of affirmative action in the 1980’s, college enrollment by race and graduation by race has remained stagnant, ultimately signifying the inefficiency of the policy. In The Wall Street Journal on “Some Data on Race and College Enrollment,” data reveals that college enrollment of Hispanics and African Americans only increased about five percent from 1980 to 2015. This small amount of increase in college enrollment over the past three decades clearly exhibits the fruitless results of affirmative action in college admission.  In addition, the struggle to fit in to the overwhelming environment leads to the creation of small sects based on race. In “The Case Against Affirmative Action,” Professor David Sacks states that affirmative action “has led Stanford to create racially segregated dormitories, racially segregated freshman orientation programs, racially segregated graduation ceremonies and curricular requirements in race theory.” Underqualified minorities in prestigious colleges are shocked by their new expectations and are discounted as getting lucky. After being intimidated by the people and the school, students look for people they can relate to so they end up diverging into a multitude of sects based on race. This division of races on campus is the complete opposite of what an ideal diverse campus should look like.

Supporters of affirmative action argue that equal outcome is more important than equal opportunity, ultimately suggesting that some people need more help than others. Supporters also argue that the United States has historically served underrepresented populations. However, the principles of the United States, corroborated by the 14th amendment, supports equal opportunity over equal outcome. In addition, universities should not be the place to right the wrongs of the racial differences of the past. Universities have finite resources and produce the future of this country. Our country has to compete with other countries in term of science, technology, and social standards, and this would not be possible with under qualified people. Although diversity on college campuses is beneficial, there is too much at stake in universities to make them labs where the outcomes of diversity are tested.

Affirmative action unfairly limits college admissions of overrepresented races and also leads to unsuccessfulness of the under-qualified students both during and after college, ultimately jeopardizing both demographics. Although the main goal of affirmative action in higher education is to increase racial diversity on college campuses, the policy ironically leads to more segregation and stagnant results. Every single student must have equal opportunity and should not be evaluated based on race.