Atlantic writer Jemele Hill sparked controversy when she asserted that Asian Americans who praised the US Supreme Court's ruling on affirmative action were essentially supporting white supremacy. The court, in a 6-3 decision, declared the use of race as a factor in college admissions to be unconstitutional under the 14th Amendment's equal protection clause.
After the ruling, many Asian Americans, including Yiatin Chu, the president of the Asian Wave Alliance, celebrated the decision as a step towards achieving equal treatment at major universities. Chu shared her joy on Twitter, recounting a conversation with her daughter who saw it as a victory for their cause.
However, Hill and other liberal personalities criticized the decision and targeted Asian Americans for their support. Hill accused them of carrying water for white supremacy and betraying the fight for Asian American rights in America.
The Supreme Court case originated from allegations that Asian American students were being discriminated against by facing higher standards compared to black or Hispanic students due to affirmative action policies. Complaints against Harvard and the University of North Carolina raised concerns about the schools' practices and whether they employed race-neutral alternatives effectively.
While the ruling was seen as a victory for Asian American students advocating for fair treatment, progressives argued that it effectively legalized discrimination against black students. Princeton professor Eddie Glaude expressed concerns about a potentially segregated higher education landscape favoring predominantly white and Asian students.
Hill's accusation of minority groups supporting white supremacy is not without controversy. In a previous incident involving the police beating of Tyre Nichols, she contended that black people also carried the water for white supremacy, emphasizing the systemic issues behind such incidents.
The discussion surrounding affirmative action and its impact on different racial groups remains complex and highly debated, with varying perspectives on its effectiveness and implications for equality.