Mock Trial #4 Reax

 Mock Trial #4 Reax

The justice giving the final summary at the trial

This week's mock trial was on the case of Board of Regents vs. Bakke. Previous mock trials put issues up for debate that, in today's age, are no longer considered debatable; there is one clearly morally correct side. For example: slavery, and segregation. These two practices are considered morally heinous and are no longer seriously argued. This week's trial, however, put to debate an issue that is still commonly argued today: affirmative action. Affirmative action is the practice of favoring groups regarded as disadvantaged or subject to discrimination. (Oxford Languages) This practice still exists today and many people see it as clearly discriminatory, while others see it as necessary for ensuring equality.

In the particular case of Board of Regents vs. Bakke, Allan Bakke was a white male who was rejected from the University of California. Bakke noticed that African Americans with similar grades and scores to him did get accepted. So he decided to sue claiming that the practice of affirmative actions violated his right to equal protection under the fourteenth amendment.

In my opinion, this was the best mock trial. There were so many strong, and unique arguments on both sides. I'll go through some of the arguments that particularly stood out to me, starting with the side arguing in favor of the defendant, the Board of Regents.

Board of Regents Arguments

https://media-cldnry.s-nbcnews.com/

Kasen had a really interesting and thought provoking argument on diversity. Affirmative action, he states, will ensure that a college campus is diverse. Diversity enhances the learning experience by allowing students to hear from many different perspectives. This is a really simple and effective argument. Everything he says here is true. I can speak from experience because I was raised in New Hampshire, a state that is 99% white people. The lack of diversity closed me off from those different perspectives and studying here at High Point University, I already feel like I'm getting a better grasp on those perspectives. So I really like Kasen's argument here. 

Another argument that stood out to me was from Lindsay Paris. She argues that historic racist institutions, such as slavery and segregation, have left long lasting scars on the black community. Affirmative action is a way to build these people back up to where they would be economically had these institutions never existed. Abby A. builds upon this argument saying that "colorblindness is not equality." This was a great way to finish of this side of arguments and I found it incredibly powerful, especially Abby's quote. My EOTO topic was redlining and I my research led me to similar findings; although racism and segregation are over, the fact that those practices existed while white people got to live normal lives with normal opportunity, gave them a massive head start that much of the black community hasn't been able to catch up to. Affirmative action actually gives them these opportunities. Great arguments all around from this side.

Bakke Arguments

https://chronicle.brightspotcdn.com/

Sam had a lot of interesting things to say about affirmative action. The first things that stood out to me
is that she said instead of forcing students into colleges they aren't ready for, the primary and secondary education systems should be improved in a way that puts everyone on that equal level of opportunity. She also said that affirmative action will perpetuate a narrative of dependency for African Americans, which is a really thought provoking argument. Finally she mentioned how there are over 100 historically black colleges as an option for this historically disenfranchised group. Her argument described multiple interesting alternatives to affirmative action and that made it really strong.

Another argument on the side of Bakke I believe was very strong was Clara's. She made a lot of points about how the whole concept of affirmative action is just discriminatory. But what really caught my attention was one of her later points, where she explained that affirmative action puts people in colleges they are not ready for, which will just cause them to drop out, which defeats the entire purpose of affirmative action in the first place. This is such a simple but effective argument, amazing way to end off this side of arguments. 

Sources:

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/regents_of_the_university_of_california_v_bakke_(1978)

https://www.oyez.org/cases/1979/76-811

https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/438/265/