In anticipation of what is likely to be a landmark Supreme Court decision in the case of Fisher v. University of Texas, Reaffirming Racismexamines how the traditional affirmative action debate reflects an ultimately conservative and apologetic view of racial justice. Criticizing both conservative opponents of the policies who profess concern over departures from colorblindness as well as liberals who say such policies are needed to remedy past discrimination or to achieve diverse institutions, Reaffirming Racismexposes the shared and misguided ideology that has dominated racial justice discourse for nearly half a century. On both the left and the right pundits and politicians erroneously assume that the category of merit itself is neutral, impersonal, and somehow developed outside of the social capital defined by race, class, and gender. The contributors to Reaffirming Racismbring into focus the blurry intellectual and political gray zone situated between the controversial claims of writers such as Walter Benn Michaels ( The Trouble with Diversity) or Shelby Steele ( The Content of Our Character) and the well-intentioned but imprudent diversity logic of Sandra Day O'Connor's notorious 2003 opinion in the University of Michigan Law School case ( Grutter v. Bollinger). Featuring many of the most influential voices in the contemporary debates over affirmative action including Mari Matsuda, Chuck Lawrence, and Sumi Cho, this groundbreaking work of criticism is an essential and timely compendium of the very best thinking on why higher education and American society at large cannot afford to reverse the progress achieved through affirmative action.