Richard Kahlenberg is an old-school liberal, committed to narrowing the gap between rich and poor. He’s also one of the leading critics of racial preferences in college admissions, having served as an expert witness for the plaintiffs in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, the Supreme Court case that effectively ended the practice. In his new book, Class Matters, Kahlenberg lays out the connection between these commitments.
Notably, Kahlenberg’s opposition to affirmative action doesn’t seem to be rooted in instinct or ideology. His concerns are practical. First, racial preferences divide the working class, making political solidarity harder to achieve. More significantly, the gatekeepers at selective colleges seem far more invested in race than in class—eliminating racial preferences, he argues, might finally force them to focus on economic disadvantage.
Citing studies of admissions data, Kahlenberg explains that, prior to Students for Fair Admissions, preferences for black applicants tended to be substantial, while those for lower-income students were minimal or nonexistent. Because wealthier students generally have stronger academic credentials—and can afford steep tuition—elite colleges became havens for a multiracial upper class, doing little to dismantle class barriers. Race-based affirmative action let these institutions achieve the aesthetic diversity they sought without making serious investments in financial aid.
