Representative Yong Kim Introduces Bill Against Discrimination in Schools

Representative Yong Kim is advocating for a new bill aimed at blocking federal funding for schools that engage in discrimination based on race, sex, ethnicity, color, or national origin in their student aid processes.

This initiative coincides with California Democrats’ efforts to reinstate affirmative action in public education.

Kim plans to introduce the Stop DEI Act on Wednesday, which directly addresses Section 7 of the ACA. If voters approve this section, it would amend the state constitution, enabling race- and gender-based preferences in most public education programs.

Kim stated, “Schools that provide aid based on merit or financial need do not need to worry; this bill targets institutions that prioritize identity over equal treatment.” She emphasized, “No one wants to be merely a DEI checkbox, whether you’re Asian, Black, Hispanic, or White.”

As the first Korean-American woman elected to Congress, Kim expressed concerns that ACA 7 could reverse significant progress in combating discrimination in education. She noted, “I do not want ACA 7 to jeopardize Proposition 209 and undermine decades of advancements toward equitable treatment under the law. Taxpayer money should support students based on merit, not a system that chooses winners and losers based on identity politics.”

Back in 1996, voters approved a measure that amended the state constitution to prohibit any form of discrimination or preferential treatment based on race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national identity in public employment, education, or contracts.

ACA 7 has already cleared the state Assembly but still needs state Senate approval before it can appear on the November ballot. This new measure would notably weaken existing protections in public education.

William Jacobson, a law professor at Cornell University and founder of the Equal Protection Project, pointed out that “discrimination is permitted under the state constitution in K-12 education. It would also be allowed in higher education, except for admissions.”

He believes that the limitations posed by this bill are ineffective, particularly in light of a recent Supreme Court ruling that banned race-based affirmative action in college admissions. Jacobson noted, “The legal principles established in that ruling apply broadly and don’t just pertain to admissions.”

He also recently submitted a letter to the Higher Education and Appropriations committees, voicing opposition to the bill, arguing that it contravenes the equality commitment outlined in the 14th Amendment and Prop. 209. Jacobson warned that the DEI Termination Act could lead to less accountability for schools once anti-discrimination measures are relaxed.

He said, “While the bill could have a preventive effect, the real question is, why is that necessary? California should adhere to its current standards.”

In 2020, voters rejected an effort to reintegrate affirmative action by turning down Proposition 16, which aimed to allow considerations of gender and ethnicity in public education, employment, and contracts.

Reflecting on the ongoing debates, Kim remarked, “We thought we had put an end to this issue, but it keeps resurfacing. I trust voters understand that we need the right leadership in Sacramento.”

The paper reached out to Democratic Rep. Corey Jackson, the author of the ACA 7, for a response but did not receive any comments.