Defunct Newspapers Journals TV channels Websites Other Congressional caucuses Economics Gun rights Identity politics Nativist Religion Watchdog groups Youth/student groups Miscellaneous Other Edward Jay Blum (born 1952) is an American conservative legal strategist who opposes classifications and preferences based on race and ethnicity.
[2] He was a key figure in Bush v. Vera and the Students for Fair Admissions v. President and Fellows of Harvard College lawsuits.
[3] Blum was born in 1952 into a Jewish family in Benton Harbor, Michigan, where his parents owned and operated a shoe store.
He describes his parents as generally left-wing liberals who supported Democratic presidents like Franklin Roosevelt and Harry S. Truman and that he was, eventually, "the first Republican my mother ever met".
[4] Blum holds a fellowship at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) where his areas of research include civil rights policy, affirmative action, multiculturalism, and redistricting.
His litigation includes United States Supreme Court cases Bush v. Vera (1996), Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District No.
[11] The Fisher case, which challenged the University of Texas's (UT) consideration of race in its undergraduate admissions process, was decided at the Supreme Court in 2013 and again in 2016.
[12] The second time, the Court applied the heightened legal standard to UT's admission policy, concluding that it passes muster and upholding it.
Blum has publicly stated: "SFFA’s guiding principle is that race-based admissions policies, no matter how well-intentioned, are unfair, deeply polarizing, and illegal.
She also wrote that "Harvard has demonstrated that no workable and available race-neutral alternatives would allow it to achieve a diverse student body while still maintaining its standards for academic excellence.
"[17] SFFA petitioned the Supreme Court to review both the First Circuit's decision in the Harvard case and a similar decision from the Middle District of North Carolina, Students for Fair Admissions v. University of NC, et al., which focused on the impact on both Caucasian and Asian American applicants at the University of North Carolina and which had been decided in the school's favor in October 2021.
In writing the majority opinion, Chief Justice John Roberts held that using race as an explicit “plus” factor in college admissions is unconstitutional.
And the District Court observed that Harvard’s ‘policy of considering applicants’ race... overall results in fewer Asian American and white students being admitted.’ 397 F. Supp.