New Issues on Law and Philosophy of Affirmative Action

The justifiability of affirmative action has been one of the most controversial issues in the fields of legal, moral, and social philosophy. Since late Ronald Dworkin, a prominent legal philosopher, argued for a racial quota in the admission process of a medical school (which the US Supreme Court struck down in the famous Bakke Case [1978]) in his book Taking Rights Seriously, a number of legal and moral philosophers have discussed whether, when and why affirmative action policies are justified. In 2023 June, the US Supreme Court invalidated the selection methods of Harvard University and the University of North Carolina in SFFA Case (2023), which, some argued, substantially overturned the Grutter Case (2003), in which the Supreme Court upheld the selection method of University of Michigan Law School that considered applicants’ race as one of many factors. More recently, the second Donald Trump administration has taken further step to terminate “DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion)” programs altogether.

In this workshop, a wide range of issues will be discussed concerning affirmative action from the perspectives of legal, moral and social philosophy. I, Yuichiro Mori, an associate professor at Hokkaido University (Japan) and the convenor of this workshop, have worked on theories of equality and discrimination in the fields of legal and political philosophy (I contributed the entry “Relational Equality” to Encyclopedia of the Philosophy of Law and Social Philosophy, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6730-0_1134-1). I was a visiting scholar at Harvard Law School from 2023-2025, having worked on legal and philosophical issues concerning affirmative action in scarce medical resource allocation (my recent publication on this topic is “Making Sense of Race-Based Affirmative Action in Allocating Scarce Medical Resources,” Res Philosophica, 101 (3), https://doi.org/10.5840/resphilosophica2024326115). I hosted a special workshop with a similar topic in the previous world congress in Seoul (https://ivr2024.org/html_file.php?file=sw_034.html&file2=sw_default.html), where I also won the Young Scholar Prize (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m8DT-oV4IQg). At this workshop, I will deliver a presentation, as well as serving as the moderator.

Any paper related to affirmative action is welcome, but I highly encourage the submission from those purporting to raise relatively novel topics or bring about new perspectives into affirmative action debates. There is no restriction with respect to methodology in law and philosophy, but those familiar with analytical philosophy are especially welcome. The topics presented at this workshop might include (but not limited to):

– On the possible domains of affirmative action other than workplace and education (e.g., health, immigration, criminal sentencing, military/non-military civic duties).

– On the justifiability of affirmative action programs against those (typically considered) already disadvantaged (e.g., higher standards for Asians and women in the admission process of “Ivy League” universities in the US to maintain racial-gender balance).

– On affirmative-action-related issues provoked by the advent of artificial intelligence (AI) (e.g., Is it permissible or required to consider race or gender when designing fair AI algorithm? If so, how they can do so in a morally and legally permissible way? Can the idea of “personalized law” [that utilizes big data and AI algorithm] be applied to affirmative action policies?)

– On affirmative action and inter-generational justice (e.g., Even if affirmative action is justified as a temporary measure to eliminate the effect of past and present discrimination, how should the burden be shared between different present and future cohorts in order for it to be fair?)

– On fit between means and ends and diverse conception of “treatment as an individual” (e.g., Would the best equality-of-opportunity affirmative action [that pays due consideration to all disadvantageous traits] collapse into individual [rather than group]-based redistributive programs? Does “treatment as an individual” direct us toward “more information” rather than “blindness”?)

– On conceptual distinctions between different measures and principles (e.g., Is point-system relevantly distinct from a quota in terms of fairness for individuals? Is indirect affirmative action better than its direct counterpart? How different is “anti-classification” principle from “color/gender-blindness”?)

If you are interested in delivering a presentation at this workshop, please send your abstract (between 300 and 500 words) to [email protected] by March 15, 2026. Sending your full paper in addition is highly welcome but not mandatory.

Important Note:

This workshop is “child-friendly” one. Both presenters and participants are welcome to bring their children to this workshop if they wish. If you have any question or special concern, please do not hesitate to reach out to the convenor!