Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Unraveling progress: The Supreme Court's ruling and its detrimental effect on mental health

Unraveling progress: The Supreme Court's ruling and its detrimental effect on mental health
Getty Images

Hilda H. McClure is the Chief Operating Officer at the Cannenta Center for Healing and Empowerment and a Public Voices Fellow of the OpEd Project. She brings extensive expertise in trauma counseling adults. With a passion for empowering individuals, she also serves as a college counselor, leading Latinx Student Initiatives, a college professor and provides training to professionals in effectively serving the Hispanic community.



The Supreme Court recently ended affirmative action for institutions of higher education. As we continue to deal with the mental health crisis, a little known consequence of the Supreme Court’s decision is the impact this decision will have on our nation’s mental health process, particularly the potential for creating more problems for our youth.

College students struggling with mental health concerns are at an all-time high, with 15 percent of students stating that they are contemplating suicide. As these campuses' demographics and diversity change, BIPOC students will be at greater risk for bias, prejudice and racism. Research shows that those who have been regularly treated unfairly can be more susceptible to mental health conditions such as low self-esteem and at higher risk for anxiety and depression.

Affirmative action opened doors for brilliant, deserving students of color to get into college and was designed to level the playing field for students. This Supreme Court ruling is taking us back many years

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

The APA CEO stated, “Scientific research has also found that exposure to diversity enhances critical thinking and promotes deeper information processing and problem-solving skills, among other benefits. Without purposeful attention to achieving diverse student bodies, our institutions of higher learning are likely to grow even more racially and ethnically polarized.”

One likely outcome of the Supreme Court ruling relates to the continued shortage of BIPOC therapists in the U.S. as most programs are out of reach due to high cost, lack of diversity in programming, and unpaid rigorous internships. This ruling is likely to further reduce the number of POC students getting into these needed programs, potentially creating the perfect storm of furthering the mental health crisis for generations to come.

All these factors will continue to erode the younger generation's mental health, while also inhibiting those therapists, programs, and resources from being available. Today’s choices will impact tomorrow’s workforce, economy and overall country’s well-being.

Affirmative action does not grant minority students unwarranted advantages or diminish students’ accomplishments in lieu of their race or ethnicity. Instead, it rectifies the historical discrimination faced by marginalized communities by offering them the same opportunities as their peers.

Though we may not be able to change the Supreme Court ruling, we can champion and advocate for colleges the value in diversity and inclusion efforts and to invest accordingly. In order to build a brighter future in the U.S., we must create and provide equitable opportunities for all students by addressing unequal funding, inadequate resources in underprivileged communities and the lack of culturally sensitive mental health resources.

Read More

Large Bipartisan Majorities Oppose Deep Cuts to Foreign Aid

The Program for Public Consultation at the University of Maryland releases a new survey, fielded February 6-7, 2025, with a representative sample of 1,160 adults nationwide.

Pexels, Tima Miroshnichenko

Large Bipartisan Majorities Oppose Deep Cuts to Foreign Aid

An overwhelming majority of 89% of Americans say the U.S. should spend at least one percent of the federal budget on foreign aid—the current amount the U.S. spends on aid. This includes 84% of Republicans and 94% of Democrats.

Fifty-eight percent oppose abolishing the U.S. Agency for International Development and folding its functions into the State Department, including 77% of Democrats and 62% of independents. But 60% of Republicans favor the move.

Keep ReadingShow less
A Super Bowl of Unity

A crowd in a football stadium.

Getty Images, Adamkaz

A Super Bowl of Unity

Philadelphia is known as the City of Brotherly Love, and perhaps it is fitting that the Philadelphia Eagles won Sunday night's Super Bowl 59, given the number of messages of unity, resilience, and coming together that aired throughout the evening.

The unity messaging started early as the pre-game kicked off with movie star Brad Pitt narrating a moving ad that champions residence and togetherness in honor of those who suffered from the Los Angeles fires and Hurricane Helen:

Keep ReadingShow less
The Paradox for Independents

A handheld American Flag.

Canva Images

The Paradox for Independents

Political independents in the United States are not chiefly moderates. In The Independent Voter, Thomas Reilly, Jacqueline Salit, and Omar Ali make it clear that independents are basically anti-establishment. They have a "mindset" that aims to dismantle the duopoly in our national politics.

I have previously written about different ways that independents can obtain power in Washington. First, they can get elected or converted in Washington and advocate with their own independent voices. Second, they can seek a revolution in which they would be the most dominant voice in Washington. And third, a middle position, they can seek a critical mass in the Senate especially, namely five to six seats, which would give them leverage to help the majority party get to 60 votes on policy bills.

Keep ReadingShow less
The Bureaucrat’s Dilemma When Dealing with a Charismatic Autocrat

A single pawn separated from a group of pawns.

Canva Images

The Bureaucrat’s Dilemma When Dealing with a Charismatic Autocrat

Excerpt from To Stop a Tyrant by Ira Chaleff

In my book To Stop a Tyrant, I identify five types of a political leader’s followers. Given the importance of access in politics, I range these from the more distant to the closest. In the middle are bureaucrats. No political leader can accomplish anything without a cadre of bureaucrats to implement their vision and policies. Custom, culture and law establish boundaries for a bureaucrat’s freedom of action. At times, these constraints must be balanced with moral considerations. The following excerpt discusses ways in which bureaucrats need to thread this needle.

Keep ReadingShow less