These State Laws Support Racially Discriminatory Scholarships – City Journal

Report on State-Level Educational Scholarship Policies and Sustainable Development Goals

Introduction: Aligning Educational Funding with Global Equality Standards

A 2023 Supreme Court decision regarding university admissions has intensified scrutiny of race-conscious scholarship programs, prompting a re-evaluation of state laws governing educational funding. This analysis examines current state-level scholarship policies through the lens of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities), SDG 4 (Quality Education), and SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions). The core issue is whether existing legislative frameworks ensure equal opportunity and non-discriminatory practices, which are fundamental to achieving these global objectives.

Analysis of State Scholarship Programs in the Context of SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

SDG Target 10.3 calls for ensuring equal opportunity and reducing inequalities of outcome, including by eliminating discriminatory laws, policies, and practices. Several state laws governing scholarship and grant distribution contain criteria based on racial and ethnic identity, which warrants examination against this standard.

Case Studies in State-Sanctioned Preferential Scholarship Criteria

• Florida: The Florida Fund for Minority Teachers (FFMT), established by state law, has disbursed over $45 million for Minority Teacher Education Scholarships. While intended to address diversity in education, this program’s race-specific eligibility criteria raise questions regarding its alignment with the principle of universal, non-discriminatory access central to SDG 10.
• New York: The Collegiate Science and Technology Entry Program (CSTEP) and the Science and Technology Entry Program (STEP) aim to increase the number of “historically underrepresented and economically disadvantaged students” in STEM fields. Eligibility is restricted to low-income students or those identified as black, Hispanic, or Native American. This structure permits a middle-class student from a designated racial group to receive benefits while excluding a middle-class student from another, challenging the goal of reducing inequality for all.
• Missouri: State law mandates the “Minority and Underrepresented Environmental Literacy Program,” a scholarship for “severely underrepresented minority ethnic groups” in environmental studies. This policy highlights the challenge of promoting diversity in specialized fields while adhering to the non-discriminatory principles of SDG 16.b.
• Iowa: The Iowa Minority Academic Grants for Economic Success program exists in state law, though it is currently unfunded. The persistence of this statutory language necessitates a legislative review to ensure state policies are fully aligned with contemporary commitments to equal opportunity.

The Imperative for Institutional Reform: Advancing SDG 4 and SDG 16

Achieving SDG 4, which seeks to ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all, is intrinsically linked to the fairness of the institutions that govern it (SDG 16). Effective, accountable, and transparent institutions must enforce non-discriminatory laws and policies to build public trust and guarantee equal access.

Legislative Progress Towards Non-Discriminatory Policies

Some states are proactively reforming their legal frameworks to better align with principles of equality and non-discrimination. These actions represent tangible steps toward fulfilling SDG 16.b, which advocates for the promotion and enforcement of non-discriminatory laws for sustainable development.

1. Arkansas: In 2025, revised requirements for state-funded scholarships will prohibit discrimination or preferential treatment.
2. Indiana: Similarly, in 2025, Indiana will implement revised scholarship requirements to eliminate discriminatory or preferential criteria.

Conclusion: Recommitting to Equal Opportunity for Sustainable Development

State governments have a critical responsibility to ensure that public funding for education is administered in a manner consistent with the principles of equal opportunity and non-discrimination. A thorough review and reform of state laws governing scholarships are essential to align with the objectives of SDG 4 (Quality Education) and SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities). Eliminating discriminatory criteria in public funding is a foundational step toward building the strong, just, and inclusive institutions envisioned in SDG 16, thereby ensuring that educational opportunities contribute to sustainable development for all citizens.

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals in the Article

SDG 4: Quality Education

The article directly addresses SDG 4 by focusing on access to tertiary education through scholarships and grants. The core issue is the criteria for these financial aid programs, which impacts the goal of ensuring inclusive and equitable education for all.

SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

This is a central theme of the article. The text revolves around the debate on racial preferences in scholarship programs, framing it as an issue of “racial discrimination” versus “equal opportunity for all.” This aligns with SDG 10’s aim to reduce inequality within a country by promoting inclusion and eliminating discriminatory laws and policies.

SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

The article connects to SDG 16 by discussing the legal framework governing education funding. It references the Supreme Court, state laws, and the role of government institutions in distributing funds. The call to eliminate discriminatory laws and “rebuild public trust” speaks to the goal of developing effective, accountable, and non-discriminatory institutions.

Identified SDG Targets

Targets under SDG 4: Quality Education

• Target 4.3: By 2030, ensure equal access for all women and men to affordable and quality technical, vocational and tertiary education, including university. The article’s entire discussion on scholarships (e.g., Florida’s Minority Teacher Education Scholarships, New York’s CSTEP/STEP grants) is about facilitating access to tertiary education. The debate highlighted is whether the current access is “equal for all.”

Targets under SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

• Target 10.2: By 2030, empower and promote the social, economic and political inclusion of all, irrespective of age, sex, disability, race, ethnicity, origin, religion or economic status or other status. The article argues that certain scholarship programs are not inclusive of all, stating that in New York’s program, “a middle-class white or Asian student is excluded,” which runs counter to the principle of inclusion irrespective of race.
• Target 10.3: Ensure equal opportunity and reduce inequalities of outcome, including by eliminating discriminatory laws, policies and practices and promoting appropriate legislation, policies and action in this regard. This target is directly addressed by the article’s call to “eliminate racial discrimination” in state laws governing scholarships. It also highlights progress towards this target by mentioning that “Arkansas and Indiana revised requirements for state-funded scholarships to prohibit discrimination or preferential treatment.”

Targets under SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

• Target 16.b: Promote and enforce non-discriminatory laws and policies for sustainable development. The article discusses the enforcement of non-discriminatory principles through the Supreme Court’s decision and the subsequent legislative actions in states like Arkansas and Indiana to remove “race-conscious language from laws.”

Implied Indicators for Measuring Progress

Indicators for SDG 4 Targets

• Indicator for Target 4.3: The amount of public funding allocated to scholarships for tertiary education. The article provides a specific figure: “Florida has spent more than $45 million across more than two decades on Minority Teacher Education Scholarships.” This serves as a quantifiable indicator of financial support for access to education.

Indicators for SDG 10 Targets

• Indicator for Target 10.3: The number and content of laws and policies that contain race-based or other preferential criteria. The article identifies specific discriminatory policies, such as Missouri’s “Minority and Underrepresented Environmental Literacy Program” for “severely underrepresented minority ethnic groups” and Iowa’s “Minority Academic Grants for Economic Success.”
• Indicator for Target 10.3: The number of laws revised or enacted to prohibit discrimination. The article points to legislative changes in “Arkansas and Indiana” as a measure of progress in eliminating discriminatory policies.

Indicators for SDG 16 Targets

• Indicator for Target 16.b: The existence of high-level legal rulings and subsequent legislative actions aimed at enforcing non-discriminatory principles. The article cites the “Supreme Court’s 2023 Students for Fair Admissions decision” as a key event, and the state-level legal revisions as an indicator of its enforcement.

SDGs, Targets and Indicators Summary

Source: city-journal.org