Join Us Donate Search

Messaging And Report Category: Messaging Memo

Speaking Out on SB4, Texas’ Harmful Racial Profiling Law

​

Last week, the city of Houston joined other Texas cities in a lawsuit challenging the state’s discriminatory new law, SB4. Dubbed an “anti-sanctuary city” measure, the law prohibits cities, towns, and even campus police departments from pursuing inclusion and integration of immigrant students and community members. Specifically, SB4 makes it illegal for municipalities and campus police departments to instruct their staff not to question the nationality and immigration status of the people they serve. The law also forces localities and campus police departments to allow their staff to provide people’s nationality and other personal information to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), even when those entities have decided that doing so would be harmful to their residents, students, and mission. If it is not stopped, SB4 will go into effect on September 1, 2017.

It’s crucial that social justice leaders, organizations, and everyday people raise their voices to reverse or repeal this unconstitutional and harmful law in Texas, and to ensure that it is not adopted in other states or localities. To help in those communications, The Opportunity Agenda offers the communications tips and resources that follow. For additional communications tools and insights, visit our website.

  • Lead with Shared Values. New research by The Opportunity Agenda, National Council of La Raza (NCLR), and Lake Research Partners shows that leading with the foundational values of dignity, freedom, respect, and opportunity is important to overcoming fear and divisiveness about immigrants and immigration. Also crucial (including among skeptical audiences) is the idea that diversity is one of our nation’s (and state’s) greatest strengths, making us stronger and helping us to solve tough problems together. Read the findings here.
  • Explain how SB4 promotes discrimination that hurts us all. Explain that this law is harmful and divisive, and that it encourages discrimination. Highlight that “no matter who someone is, the accent they have, or their background,” everyone should be treated fairly and equally under the law. Note that we are stronger when everyone’s dignity and rights are respected, and this law drags us backward in the wrong direction.
  • Acknowledge frustration and offer real solutions. Many persuadable audiences who have concerns about SB4’s discriminatory nature are also worried about job competition and strains on our safety net. It’s often important to acknowledge the legitimate aspects of those concerns and point to solutions that move us all forward together, like worker protections and investing in opportunity for all communities.

Building on language tested by NCLR and The Opportunity Agenda, consider this sample messaging which is structured as a “VPSA” (Value, Problem, Solution Action):

“America is a nation of values, founded on an idea – that all men and women are created equal. And while we all have our circles, whether they are our family, co-workers, or friends on Facebook, how we treat others outside of our circles reflects our commitment to the values that define us as Americans. It’s not about what you look like or where you were born that makes you American – it’s how you live your life and what you do that defines you here in this country. We are better, as people, and as a country, when we welcome our neighbors, care for each other, and help those in need. We are better when we embrace our differences.”

“Our country is changing, getting more and more diverse. It might make some of us uncomfortable, but it is our reality, and a constant throughout our history. Politicians play on this fear, trying to divide us. They push unwise and divisive ideas like forcing towns and schools to enforce federal immigration laws instead of pursuing their residents’ interest. If we take the bait on these, it makes our country weaker, not stronger. Our nation is stronger when every one of us can contribute and share ideas, and when everyone’s basic rights and dignity are respected. We need to embrace ideas that unify us as a diverse people and make our country stronger, and we need to speak out against discrimination and prejudice when we see it.”

​

Ten Tips for Putting Intersectionality into Practice

We all deserve to have our voices heard; our faces and experiences reflected in culture and media; and our unique needs addressed through relevant policies. However, when we fail to incorporate intersectionality into our everyday practices and policies, we leave parts of our communities behind.

Intersectionality, a term coined by Kimberlé Williams Crenshaw, recognizes that certain individuals face multiple and intersecting forms of structural discrimination. In this political climate marked by division and anxiety, it’s important for us to work together to incorporate different communities’ experiences with culture, policies, and media.

We’ve compiled ten tips for putting intersectionality into practice to promote opportunity for individuals and communities who face multiple and intersecting forms of discrimination. This list can serve as a starting point for social justice advocates, policymakers, journalists, and researchers interested in incorporating an intersectional approach in their work.

1. MULTIPLE STRUGGLES

Recognize that there are multiple forms of systemic discrimination that block people from realizing equal opportunity in the United States.

An intersectional approach acknowledges systemic discrimination due to sexual orientation and identity, gender and gender identity, race, economic status, immigration status, national origin, and ability, among other aspects of one’s identity, and that this systemic discrimination impacts access to opportunity. However, recognizing these multiple, systemic barriers to opportunity and multiple forms of prejudice is only the first step in adopting an intersectional approach.

2. INTERSECTING OPPRESSIONS

Appreciate that forms of systemic discrimination intersect with each other and present unique challenges for affected individuals and communities.

In the real world, people are often subject not only to discrimination based on multiple aspects of their identity such as their race, gender, and immigration status, but also to discrimination unique to the “intersection” of their identities. So, for example, the stereotypes and obstacles faced by a Latina immigrant differ from those faced by women of other races, native-born Latinas, or immigrant Latino men. Intersectionality goes beyond acknowledging the multiple forms of discrimination, and recognizes that the different forms of discrimination may intersect with each other and result in overlapping and reinforcing barriers to opportunity. These overlap- ping systems result in unique forms of discrimination that only impact those in that particular community. An intersectional approach might include focusing on the unique challenges that those who sit at the intersections of overlapping systems of discrimination face, such as Black immigrants (who face both racial discrimination and discrimination because of their immigration status) or homeless transgender young people (who face discrimination because of their gender identity, age, and housing status).

IN ACTION: Reproductive care facilities in a rural town in Texas close because of state-wide abortion restrictions. An advocate committed to intersectionality would not only look at how  the restrictions impact women generally, but also how particular communities of women in Texas are impacted. For example, an advocate might write an op-ed about how low-income Mexican American women in a rural community in the South are unable to obtain reproductive care because they cannot afford to drive to the nearest medical provider for reproductive care. This op-ed could also describe how these women are hesitant to drive to the community with a facility because its sheriff is notorious for profiling and arresting individuals whom he suspects are undocumented based on their race. Writing about this community of women highlights how abortion restrictions uniquely affect this particular group due to the intersection of economic barriers and discrimination based on gender, race, and perceived immigration status. It is vital to highlight how they face multiple and intersecting barriers to their reproductive health beyond how women, generally, are impacted by the Texas restrictions. Further, advocates could organize and develop policy solutions to address the issues these women face to ensure that the discussion about reproductive rights includes the experiences of women who face particular forms of harm while connecting economic, racial, and immigrant structural discrimination. The benefit of this op-ed might include encouraging new alliances, promoting solutions that consider the unique perspectives of different stakeholders, and centering their voices and experiences in the discourses about the issue. Taking an intersectional approach allows social justice leaders to focus on solutions informed by the experiences and voices of these women; engages and activates new audiences in ways that resonate with their experiences and values; and supports and uplifts the voices of these women within alliances, at town halls, social media, and letters to the editor.

IN ACTION: In The Opportunity Agenda report, “Public Opinion and Discourse on the Inter- section of LGBT Issues and Race,” we looked at current public opinion and the role of ethnic and new media in both perpetuating and challenging myths and biases about LGBTQ people. The report examined the unique issues that LGBTQ people of color face and demonstrates an approach to research that is sensitive to intersectionality. Likewise, Black Lives Matter co-founder Alicia Garza adopts an intersectional approach to policing issues affecting black people and other people of color across sexual identity, immigration, and gender by advocating for a movement against police violence that includes the voices of black queer people, black people who are undocumented, and black immigrants.

IN ACTION: In The Opportunity Agenda report, “Reproductive Justice: A Communications Overview,” we describe several case studies that illustrate how campaigns have successfully adopted an intersectional approach in obtaining reproductive justice wins. For example:

  • “Over the course of five years, from 2003 to 2008, the prevalence of rapes and sexual assaults on Indian reservations and the federal government’s dismal failure to investigate and prosecute these crimes went from being unknown to all but the victims and their families to being the subject of federal legislation. The issue’s movement from obscurity to the federal policy agenda happened in large part because of the efforts of the Native American Women’s Health Education Resource Center (NAWHERC) and other Native women advocates, and communications played an important role. Their success was based on a communications strategy that combined four components:

     

    1. Raising awareness within the National Congress of American Indians, the principal advocacy organization for American Indian and Alaska Native rights;
    2. Partnering with a human-rights organization with the resources to investigate, issue a report, and generate media coverage;
    3. Positioning themselves as the go-to experts on the issue;
    4. Engaging in media advocacy.”

3. VOICE

Respect the voice of those most affected by issues by centering their voices, respecting their goals for their communities, and stepping aside and allowing them to serve as spokespeople for their own causes.

Intersectionality requires recognition of the voice of those most directly impacted, because they are frequently excluded from mainstream conversations. Valuing voice means lifting up, promoting, and supporting the leadership and storytelling of those most affected by policies and practices and centering their substantive suggestions and values into any given project and media advocacy. Impacted communities have direct experience that makes them thought leaders in the movement for social justice. Valuing voice allows those who are affected by policies to play a substantial role in building their own story.

IN ACTION: Being formerly incarcerated in our society is, in and of itself, a particular identity that affects how an individual navigates life. The barriers to opportunity that system-involved people face are in many respects their own unique form of systemic discrimination. Criminal justice reformers should consider consulting formerly incarcerated individuals and others directly affected by arrests and imprisonment, such as family members, people on sex-related registries, and crime victims and survivors, before making criminal justice policies. For example, there has been growing awareness about the harmful practices that criminalize poverty through the incarceration of low-income individuals because they are unable to pay excessive civil court fines and fees. Projects focused on reforming these practices might consult judges and lawyers about local municipal court practices that criminalize poverty. This project could also include consultations with family members of women of color who have been incarcerated because they were unable to pay civil court fines or individuals who have been incarcerated and solicit their input for policy recommendations that respond to their unique challenges within the legal system.

IN ACTION: Policymakers should consult women before making reproductive health policies. The history of reproductive health movement in the United States is the perfect example of how important voice is. The movement started out as a pro-choice movement that arguably failed to adopt an intersectional approach until the onset of the reproductive justice movement, which made sure to consider the reproductive oppression of women of color, immigrants, LGBTQ communities, and others in vulnerable, marginalized situations when fighting for reproductive rights. The reproductive justice movement went beyond abortion rights and incorporated intersectionality to address issues of access to female reproductive health care, immigrants’ rights, LGBTQ, sex worker rights, amongst many others. As a whole, the reproductive justice movement goes beyond the right to not have a child and includes the right to have children and the right to raise them in safe environments. In this way, the reproductive health movement transitioned from one dominated by the voice of middle-class, white women to include the voices of LGBTQ people, people of color, and low-income women.

4. INCLUSIVITY

Be inclusive and incorporate different perspectives when talking about your issues.

When speaking about issues, it is critical to recognize that there are multiple voices within a movement; that there is no singular way of experiencing an issue; and that various voices and perspectives need to be considered in order to make real, lasting, and equitable change. For example, when speaking about the need to promote accountable policing, advocates should be mindful to uplift the experiences of Native American individuals, transgender communities, and women to ensure that the movement is inclusive, as their experiences within the system are often different, play into different narratives, and require different policing solutions. The “success” of an intersectional approach may be as simple as ensuring different voices are included in the dominant discourse about an issue, or identifying ways that different communities experience policies and laws.

IN ACTION: Community activists who are concerned that an undocumented woman in their community with a prior arrest for shoplifting will be deported, might stage a direct action to develop a public narrative about the perils of increasing criminalization of the immigration system and to highlight how community members like this woman will be impacted. Following this action, they might organize community members to attend town hall meetings with their federal and local legislators, and host a Twitter chat to highlight that this country should be welcoming to immigrants and should give even those with past mistakes a second chance. Community members’ advocacy for this woman might include the voices of undocumented people who are college graduates and professionals who talk about their experiences being undocumented, but it should also be inclusive of individuals with different backgrounds to move beyond narratives of the “good immigrant” and the “deserving few.” Here, being intersectional ensures that we do not inadvertently throw anyone under the bus by promoting short-term objectives that undermine our long-term goal of expanding opportunity for everyone and respecting everyone’s dignity.

5. FAMILY

Acknowledge that individuals with intersectional identities may face unique challenges in how their families are perceived and in building and sustaining their families.

An intersectional approach recognizes the importance of family, and that families are defined by those creating and sustaining them. Assessing whether there are unique impacts on the family allows for policies that ensure that those they care for the most are protected. Furthermore, women often play an integral role as care providers to children and other family members, and it is important to recognize all family structures and kinds of parents regardless of sexual or gender identity, marital status, age or biological connection to children (in the case of adoptive families, grandparents raising kids, step-parents, etc.) in making this assessment.

IN ACTION: A reporter who covers criminal justice issues doing a profile of a black woman who has been wrongfully incarcerated might consider whether this woman was a primary caregiver prior to her incarceration. The reporter might consider whether the woman has lost child custody, and research whether parental termination rates are high in her community because women of color are being racially profiled. By doing so, the reporter is able to tell a systemic story about how families are also being impacted by racially discriminatory criminal justice practices and make the connection to how the incarceration of black women destabilizes families and jeopardizes child custody, particularly within families of color that may be facing challenges due to systemic discrimination. This story might include the perspective of family members, and consider the generational impact of criminal justice policies.

6. DISAGGREGATED DATA

Ensure that data collection does not overlook the experiences of individuals with intersectional identities.

We should encourage our government to be transparent and accountable. One way to do this is to require data from government actors. This data can be disaggregated by age, race, religion, sex, gender, gender identity/expression, housing status, sexual orientation, HIV status, ethnicity, sexuality, immigration status, national origin, and religious affiliation, depending on the actor and the accountability needs of the community. Often data is unable to tell the story of communities that sit at the intersections because the data only focuses on singular aspects of their identity. Highlighting the importance of disaggregated data ensures that the experiences of communities with intersectional identities are not missing and can be uplifted. It protects the voices of those who are directly impacted by ensuring their unique experiences are recorded. It is also important to disaggregate data within groups—e.g., while Asian Americans generally fair relatively well in terms of educational outcomes, there are significant differences among Asian American nationalities, with Hmong, Laotian, and Vietnamese children facing particularly steep challenges. The “model minority” stereotype about Asian Americans tends to obscure this reality.

Researchers should be sensitive to the need for disaggregated data in public opinion research and in gathering research samples. Wherever possible, it is important to “oversample” groups (and the intersection of identities) that might not otherwise be represented in adequate numbers to draw statistically valid conclusions. This “oversample” is simply an appropriate sample of these groups, which allows researchers to make inferences about groups that are often silenced by more traditional sampling approaches.

IN ACTION: If a civilian review compliant board interested in addressing gender discrimination in policing publishes reports about women who have been subject to excessive force, but fails to publish disaggregated data about the instances of excessive force that involve Latina women or Asian women, these women with intersectional identities are not reflected in the data. This type of data collection effectively silences the experiences of individuals who face prejudice because of skin color, ethnicity, and gender.

7. INTERSECTING ISSUES & CROSS-ISSUES

Be open to thinking creatively about social justice issues, assessing how issues connect with seemingly unrelated topics, and considering how they may have unintended consequences for other areas.

Criminal justice issues are related to public health issues, and public health issues to poverty, and poverty to immigration and so on. Incorporating a truly intersectional approach requires routinely considering how various issues may be impacted, how they connect with each other, and whether one approach with one issue area will somehow undermine efforts by those working on a different, but intersecting issue area. Promoting access to opportunity requires deliberate consideration of how seemingly unrelated issues areas connect.

IN ACTION: The Immigrant Defense Project works to promote fairness and justice for immigrants in the United States and examines how issues within the criminal legal system have a unique impact on immigrants. Its work cuts across the issues of immigration and criminal justice.

IN ACTION: The Sex Workers Project is a project of the Urban Justice Center that works across the intersection of sex workers’ rights, human trafficking, policing, and LGBTQ rights. The project provides direct services to immigrant sex workers, who police frequently profile because of their appearance.

IN ACTION: Organizations that do not explicitly work across different issues may nonetheless form partnerships with organizations that work on issues that impact their communities. A group of lawmakers interested in providing bail funds for incarcerated women of color may develop a relationship with community organizations that focus on enhancing child welfare and monitoring group homes to develop a campaign to ensure that primary care providers are not incarcerated for minor offenses. These lawmakers might pass legislation that provides funds for organizations to promote collaborations that are intersectional. Funders can similarly provide funding, host convenings, and encourage groups to work in non-traditional ways.

8. COLLABORATION

Strive to collaborate with people and/or provide resources for people from different communities, issue areas, and sectors to promote transformative change.

Intersectionality should encourage cross-community, cross-sector and cross-issue collaborations, investing equally in each others’ issues, narrative goals and policy agendas. Activists, advocates, lawyers, artists, scholars, cultural workers, and strategists should work with each other collaboratively alongside those directly impacted. These types of collaborations encourage innovative solutions, expand networks, and encourage transformative change.

IN ACTION: The relationship between grassroots activists in Flint, scientists in Virginia, lawyers in Detroit, and a determined pediatrician from Michigan led to the public exposure of the Flint water crisis. Collaborations that allow individuals to work across disciplines and issue areas may lead to innovative findings, policy recommendations, and cultural works as well as a more complete understanding and eventual solution to the issue(s). Funders for social change should move beyond traditional models to promote collaborations that may bring together unlikely allies.

IN ACTION: Organizers from Black Lives Matter and the Movement for Black Lives and organizers for border communities, such as the Southern Border Communities Coalition, have been fighting against the harms of a militarized and weaponized police force. While in different spaces, these organizers’ ability to develop a shared narrative about the harms of militarized police in the face of an unaccountable police force may prove to be an effective way for building support against the increasing militarization of police. Furthermore, organizations that work with sex workers, such as the Sex Workers Project, might also speak out about militarized police and speak about their experiences with federal agents during raids, where militarized equipment is used in order to create a drumbeat about the problems associated with a militarized police.

9. HEALTH

Consider how discrimination and systemic inequality contribute to differing health outcomes and block access to healthy food, clean water, and fresh air.

The health of communities that face intersectional forms of discrimination is often overlooked. One practical way to put intersectionality into practice is to ask whether the particular health needs of individuals and communities that face overlapping and intersecting forms of oppression are being met. Looking at health data in terms of the intersections of race, ethnicity, and gender, for example, might reveal that Afro-Latinas are experiencing unique challenges that are different from Black or Latino communities or from Afro-Latino men. Similarly, Asian American women face unique risks of ovarian cancer and screening methods developed for white women don’t meet Asian American women’s health needs.

IN ACTION: After Hurricane Katrina, it came to light that a Vietnamese community had been living in a part of New Orleans particularly prone to water contamination, and were doubly hit by the floods. This was having adverse health effects, but it was harder for them to get help because, due to language barriers, they weren’t as aware of how to access health care and there weren’t enough translators.

10. COMMUNITY

While working in collaboration, highlight the importance of coming together as a community to achieve equal opportunity.

Intersectionality should highlight the importance of community. Community is a salient value for many Americans. Intersectionality recognizes this connection to community and amplifies the importance of ensuring that all members of the community are respected and enjoy access to opportunity. We should strive to include everyone in our work toward promoting social justice. We are all in the fight together and should develop narratives that ensure that none of us get left behind. Building community and encouraging alliances, coalitions, and looking out for each other will help us solve problems.

Expanding Opportunity for Everyone

Two recent studies have alleged that Ban the Box policies hurt young men of color’s chances of getting a job. The studies assume that employers discriminate against these young men because hiring staff don’t have access to any conviction record and therefore assume that applicants have a record.

These studies’ misguided attacks on Ban the Box policies are troubling for several reasons: 1) they restate the longstanding reality, that discrimination against young men of color in America exists, but do not offer solutions to battle that discrimination, and 2) they suggest questioning or repealing a policy that has successfully and measurably opened the door for many qualified jobseekers emerging from prison or jail. In addition to these problems, critics of the studies have pointed out several methodological issues with the studies.

It’s important to counter the message these studies send—that we should rethink Ban the Box—with a united strategy that focuses on our values, the bigger issues at stake, and the solutions we should all rally behind.

Therefore, it’s recommended that those speaking on behalf of these policies organize messages around four main themes:

1. We can’t tolerate discrimination in any form.

Making employment available to as many people as possible is the cornerstone of a strong community and democracy, and these studies spotlight how discrimination poses an ongoing barrier to African American job applicants.

  • Emphasize what we all believe in: opportunity, equality, and that discrimination of any kind is a barrier to opportunity and to progress. Acknowledge the biases that we all carry around in our heads and must work to overcome, and make clear that those biases should never decide someone’s employment future. There are laws to protect us all, and we should enforce them.
  • Remind people of times that they may have faced discrimination for whatever reason, and that they would want to be protected. Almost everyone has felt on the outside at some point in time; building on that empathy can help firm people’s support for anti-discrimination measures.
  • Avoid assuming audiences understand how or believe that discrimination can be decreased or eliminated. Explain that it is illegal, and that anti-discrimination laws work when they are rigorously enforced. Use examples of when enforcement has made a difference.

Opportunity is a core American value that means that we all deserve a chance to reach our potential. Discrimination is a major barrier to opportunity, and we all have a responsibility to eliminate it.

There are all kinds of wrong stories, stereotypes, and biases out there about different groups of people that hurt their chances to move forward in the world. We have to make sure we have laws that protect people from discrimination and that expand opportunity for all of us.

Government has a responsibility to ensure equal opportunity and freedom from discrimination. Virtually all of us are from families where someone was treated poorly because they were a woman, a little older, or had a disability. We need strong laws that knock down arbitrary and subtle barriers to equal access that any of us might face.

2. We should stick with successful policies.

“Ban the Box” is a commonsense first step that has been successful in moving people into employment, in expanding opportunity, in ensuring a second chance for people with criminal records, and in challenging and defeating negative stereotypes. Access to employment is the backbone of a strong community. We should stick with policies that work.

  • policies that work: commonsense, land of second chances, deserving a fresh start, and removing barriers to success for people with records. Talk about people returning from prison or jail, people with records, young people, workers, job applicants, moms, dads, family members.  We are all more than one label.
  • terms like: Felons, Offenders, Inmates, Ex-Cons, Juveniles. Using defensive language like “Ban the box policies don’t encourage discrimination…” Focus on success.

We’re a country that believes in second chances when things go badly or when people make mistakes. Ban the box policies give people with records an opportunity to start fresh and apply for a job without harmful stereotypes hanging over their heads. Having a job and financial stability is an important part of starting over and rejoining a community – it’s in everyone’s best interest to remove any barriers to success so that people really are getting a second chance.

3. Let’s focus on the real problem.

These new studies, when examined closely, don’t show that ban-the-box policies are costing African American applicants job opportunities. Race based discrimination is the problem here; ban the box policies are thoughtful solutions that have helped reveal this serious problem.

  • that we have to live up to our values and discrimination is wrong across the board. We can’t tolerate it. These studies have real flaws that we need to examine before taking their advice.
  • arguing against the studies’ conclusions before setting up a values proposition. The point is not to argue with the studies’ authors on their own terms, but instead to bring the argument back to challenging discrimination of any kind.

We want to be a country in which people have equal access to opportunity and are not blocked by discrimination. But these studies don’t pose any solutions for addressing discrimination. That alone is troubling, but they also have some real methodological issues that we need to talk about.

No one’s economic future should be threatened by stereotypes or discrimination in a hiring situation. We have laws that protect us all against that sort of thing and it’s our responsibility as a country to ensure that we build on and strengthen them, and that employers fully understand and follow them.

4. We all have a stake in removing barriers to opportunity.

We need to both expand opportunity for people with records and to remove barriers triggered by all kinds of discrimination in the hiring process. Emphasize that dismantling successful policy remedies can never be the answer.

  • that it’s about all of us, our identity as a community/state/country. We’re in it together and we all want to move forward. We all have a responsibility to tackle discriminatory practices.
  • Emphasize the question, should our children and loved ones continue to be punished for things we have already been held accountable?
  • getting forced into an “either/or” argument. We have to emphasize tackling discrimination of all kinds.

These studies say they are concerned about discrimination, but offer no real solutions to ending discrimination. We all have a stake in making sure everyone has an equal shot at success, including people with records who face some of the biggest barriers to moving forward. We need to stick with the proven policies that have protected these folks from discrimination, while also continuously working to end other forms of discrimination.

We have been successful in passing laws that protect us all from discriminatory practices. It’s our responsibility as a country to ensure that we build on and strengthen them, and that employers fully understand and follow them. 

Building a Message with VPSA: Value, Problem, Solution, Action

One useful approach to tying these themes together is to structure communications around a Value, Problem, Solution, and Action structure, meaning that each message contains these four key components:  Values (why the audience should care, and how they will connect the issue to themselves), Problem (framed as a threat to the shared values we have just invoked), Solution (to provide hope and purpose), and Action (a concrete ask of the audience, to ensure engagement and movement).

Values: Opportunity, Equality, Second Chances

Starting with values that matter to most Americans can help audiences to “hear” our messages more effectively than do dry facts or emotional rhetoric. Encouraging people to think about shared values encourages aspirational, hopeful thinking – a better place to start when entering tough conversations than fear or anxiety.

Problem: Discrimination in Any Form

Frame discrimination as the central problem here, and as a threat to our values. Talk about discrimination as a barrier to opportunity and a failure in moving toward a more equal society.

Solution: Positive Policies and Rigorous Enforcement

Be meticulously solution-oriented. Some people who understand that unequal opportunity and discrimination exist may also believe that nothing can be done about them, leading to “compassion fatigue” and inaction. Describe how ban the box policies help to decrease discrimination for people with records, while also pointing to other remedies fordiscrimination in other forms. Keep the tone aspirational – that we can decrease discrimination and remove barriers to opportunity for everyone.

Action
Give your audiences something that they can do in the short, medium, and/or long-term.

Sample VPSAs

On the studies’ findings that discrimination is happening

Value: Opportunity is a core American value that means that we all deserve a chance to reach our potential. Discrimination is a major barrier to opportunity, and we all have a responsibility to eliminate it.

Problem: As these studies show, discrimination against African American job applicants persists. This is a blow to our national values. No one’s economic future should be threatened by stereotypes or discrimination in a hiring situation.

Solution: We have been successful in passing laws that protect us all against that sort of thing. It’s our responsibility as a country to ensure that we build on and strengthen them, and that employers fully understand and follow them. 

Action: Push for the full and rigorous enforcement of equal opportunity laws that ban discrimination and uphold equal opportunity for everyone. Push to protect policies that decrease discrimination, as Ban the Box policies have done for people with records.

On the studies’ attacks on Ban the Box policies

Value: In moments like this, it’s important to take a step back and focus on our core beliefs as a country. We’ve long been a country that believes in opportunity for everyone, for equal treatment, and economic mobility. We also believe in second chances when things go badly or when people make mistakes. Ban the box policies uphold all of these values, giving people with records an opportunity to start fresh and apply for a job without harmful stereotypes hanging over their heads.

Problem: These studies ask us to reconsider these important and successful policies without addressing the core issue they identify: discrimination against African-American job applicants.

Solution: We have to address discrimination at all levels. And we have to do that without adding to the barriers people emerging from prison and jail face. Having a job and financial stability is an important part of starting over and rejoining a community – it’s in everyone’s best interest to remove any barriers to success so that people really are getting a second chance.

Action: Continue your support of this important, effective, and successful policy.

**Written in collaboration with the National Employment Law Project**

Tips for Talking About Law Enforcement Enhanced Penalty Laws

​

 Protect Community Safety by Rejecting Enhanced Penalties1

We all want safe communities and to feel protected and secure. Violence against anyone threatens that, and we all have a responsibility to stop, prevent, and condemn violence in any form.

But the recently proposed laws that require enhanced penalties for offenses involving law enforcement officials don’t do that. There are already adequate laws that ensure that those who compromise police officer safety are penalized, making enhanced penalty laws wasteful and unnecessary. Moreover, these proposed laws have additional consequences that harm communities in the long run. They impair the relationship between police and communities, interfere with people’s ability to come together as a community in peaceful demonstrations and protests, and they do nothing to improve officer wellness.

Legislators should vote no on these proposed laws that would only end up hurting communities. Instead, lawmakers should focus on policies that improve the relationship between police and communities, and that improve officer wellness and health.

Vote no on these bills and uphold true community safety.

Value at Stake: Community Safety2

1. Enhanced penalty laws would compromise community safety and impair the relationship between community members and the police.

  • In a time when the public is interested in more accountable and responsible policing, enhanced penalty laws would only impair community relations and create a legitimacy crisis, wherein community members perceive police officers as attempting to become a “protected class” that is above the law.
  • Enhanced penalty laws are often described as hate crime statutes, which intend to protect those who have experienced a “long legacy of violence, intimidation, and discrimination.” Using these laws, which are intended to protect people against discrimination because of their skin color, faith, LGBTQ status, or the fact that they have a disability, will only drive a wedge between law enforcement officers and the community.
  • Instead, lawmakers should address “rifts in the relationships between local police and the communities they protect and serve.”
  • We need to address excessive force, biased policing and other police practices failing our communities.
  • We need to address the 1,092 people killed by police in 2015 as estimated by The Guardian.

2. Officer wellness and safety can be enhanced by improving officer training and promoting best practices. 

  • The Task Force on 21st Century Policing set forth 17 recommendations to promote officer safety that include training and best practices.
  • We should invest in officer and community wellness and safety instead of spending $80 billion a year on mass incarceration.

Sample Message:

  • It is incredibly important to ensure that law enforcement officers are safe so they can carry out their duties effectively. These types of bills do nothing to invest in officer wellness or to address the everyday challenges faced by officers. They are redundant, especially because there are laws that protect officers from violence in all 50 states.

Sample Message:

  • We need policies that protect everyone, law enforcement and community members alike — and a commitment to working together to build safe communities. These kinds of bills would only erode police-community relationships and thus threaten safety for both the community and police officers.
  • Rather than take seriously the concerns communities have about the police officer’s use of excessive force, discriminatory policing, and lack of accountability for police violence, these bills further criminalize communities and will only worsen policy-community tensions.
  • At a time when our country needs to build unity, these bills sow division between police and the communities that they protect, serve, and rely on. They will only make the job of law enforcement harder than it already is.
  • Instead of providing a bridge for communication, proponents of these bills are only isolating communities and stifling the necessary dialogue that could lead to safer communities and safer law enforcement officers.

Values at Stake: Pragmatism and Commonsense Solutions

3. Enhanced penalty laws are wasteful and unnecessary.

  • All 50 states have laws that make it a serious crime to assault or kill law enforcement officers.
  • Federal law (18 U.S.C. § 1114) requires the death penalty or a life sentence for killing a federal officer.
  • Federal law (18 U.S.C. § 1121) imposes a death or life sentence for killing a local officer involved in a federal investigation.

4. Enhanced penalty laws would fuel mass incarceration.

  • These laws could result in hundreds of new offenses and federalize crimes already prosecuted by the states.
  • Some of these bills impose mandatory minimums for assault.
  • Some of these bills impose the death penalty though capital punishment, which has not proven to be a deterrent.

Sample Message

  • Our current criminal justice system is overly punitive, costly, and racially biased. This type of legislation would only exacerbate these aspects of the system and is counterproductive to ongoing efforts to put in place smart, commonsense reforms that will make the system more fair and efficient and keep Americans safe.

Values at Stake: Human Rights and Our Constitution

5. These laws threaten free speech and assembly.

  • Being able to come together as a community in peaceful demonstrations and protests is a foundational value that is enshrined in the first amendment of our Constitution. This value is core to our identity as a nation.
  • However, law enforcement officers have at times created barriers in the exercise of speech by responding to demonstrations with militarized equipment, aggression, and widespread arrests. This type of response often threatens the exercise of free speech and violates the human rights of protestors.
  • Enhanced penalty laws would increase the penalties for people facing trumped up charges during mass arrests at a protest, undermining the community’s ability to exercise free speech.

6. Enhance penalty laws would encourage racial profiling and discrimination by police officers.

  • Officers are more likely to perceive people of color, LGBTQ and HIV affected people, and people with disabilities as aggressive. They are more likely to charge these communities with resisting arrest or assault on an officer, especially if the officer is covering up excessive force, discriminatory treatment, or other wrongdoing.
  • Enhanced penalty laws would allow officers to profile these communities and then subject them to stiffer penalties and sentences because of the alleged “hate crime” that might result from these unnecessary interactions. These incentives to profile, discriminate, and further penalize communities that already have tense relationships with the police, undermine our commitment to human rights and equal justice. Instead of more criminal penalties, let’s invest in bias training that can improve relationships between police and communities.

1. This memorandum was prepared in collaboration with members of the Justice Roundtable.

2. For more information about the role of values-based messaging and for tips on speaking about policing issues generally, visit Talking About Policing Issues.

​

Talking About Economic Justice

​

Background:

Our nation aspires to be a place where everyone enjoys full and equal opportunity. However, our economy is out of balance, with significant barriers impeding the ability of many people to care for their families. At the same time, recent political developments threaten the basic standard of living for many people.

Public opinion research shows that there is shared concern about economic inequality and poverty, despite differences in how to resolve those issues. To build support for our solutions, we need to proceed strategically in our messaging. At the same time, public opinion research also shows that many Americans hold seemingly contradictory ideas about how to address poverty as well as negative stereotypes about welfare dependency, government ineptitude, and irresponsible individual choices, as well as implicit and explicit racial, ethnic, and gender biases.

This memo offers communications guidance for talking about anti-poverty initiatives, and economic equality generally, with a range of audiences. It draws on available opinion research, practical experience, and communications principles.

Talking About Poverty:

Tell Affirmative Stories: There are a lot of frustrating and incorrect stories about people experiencing poverty and the reasons for it. However, it’s important to avoid restating false arguments. Repeating misinformation, even to refute it, can cause audiences to remember it better, but not necessarily remember that it was wrong. This is particularly true when information is stated in the affirmative, as happens with the “Myth/Fact” format of disputing untruths, for example: “Myth: The flu vaccine can sometimes cause the flu. Fact: The flu vaccine does not cause the flu.” The better approach is to proactively put forward what is true: “The flu vaccine prevents the flu.” Or, “This policy change assumes that poor people are lazy. They’re not.” A better approach: “We all want economic security so that we can provide for our families, but this policy would create huge new barriers in our communities.”

Focus on Shared Values and Messaging to Uplift Each Other’s Voices and Concerns: Emphasize the value of Equal Opportunity, i.e. what you look like, your accent, or your zip code should not predetermine your chances in life. Shared messaging should build on public concerns about growing inequality, low wages, and long-term unemployment while educating audiences about less visible forces like racial and gender bias, globalization, and tax/labor policies. Other key values: Community (we are all in it together and share responsibility for the common good); Family/Security (we should all have access to the resources necessary to provide for ourselves and our families); Pragmatism/Prevention (focusing on what works from a commonsense perspective and addressing root causes before they lead to even bigger problems. Cost saving and efficiency arguments frequently tap this value).

Focus on Real-World Economic Challenges: Move beyond official government definitions and, instead, touch on the real-world challenges facing many Americans, while also highlighting the solutions. For instance, talk about the challenges of holding down two jobs and still having to make choices between groceries and school supplies.

Document and Explain Unequal Obstacles—not only unequal outcomes or disparities. Although there is greater understanding than in the past, many Americans (including many low-income Americans) are not aware of the unequal obstacles facing people trying to move out of poverty. Avoid talking about gaps and instead focus on barriers and obstacles that we have the power to remove through sensible policies.

Highlight Systemic Solutions For Systemic Problems: We need to move audiences beyond an individual understanding of poverty, i.e. the extreme “personal responsibility” narrative that blames poverty almost exclusively on the work ethic and decision making of individuals. Fortunately, most Americans agree that “the primary cause of America’s problems is an economic system that results in continuing inequality and poverty.” We need to build on this and describe how our solutions can reduce or eliminate poverty. We also need to describe those solutions in human terms (i.e. “people living in poverty”) not with acronyms or jargon (i.e. “TANF” or “SNAP”).

Show the Connections: Americans intuitively understand that when our economy is out of balance and favors some more than others, it holds us back as a country and creates an environment in which serious social problems develop and worsen. Showing and telling how economic actors and policies have thrown our economy out of balance and how that affects all of us—storytelling, data and real world examples—is crucial.

Acknowledge and Confront Deep-Seated Stereotypes: Conversations about poverty tend to be racialized and gendered—meaning that audiences bring subconscious stereotypes to terms like “welfare,” “food stamps,” “homelessness,” and even “poverty.” They tend to over-associate poverty with people of color (especially women of color) and the negative stereotypes surrounding them. Remind audiences that achieving racial and gender equity upholds our values and benefits our entire society. Over-document the barriers to equal opportunity—especially racial bias. Lead by talking about how studies have found that employment agencies frequently preferred less qualified white applicants to more qualified black applicants. Acknowledge the progress we’ve made, which helps to persuade skeptical audiences to lower their defenses and have a reasoned discussion rooted in reality rather than rhetoric. Select stories that demonstrate systemic causes and solutions over stories that largely focus on individual choices.

Build on Policies with High Levels of Support: A number of anti-poverty strategies receive high levels of support from the public, i.e. raising the federal minimum wage and increasing taxes on those earning over $1 million annually.

Possible Answers to Frequently Asked Questions

Q:  Times are tough for everyone. Why should we give a handout to people who haven’t helped themselves?

A:  You and I know our society is at its best when everyone has the opportunity to fulfill their potential and pursue their dreams. America succeeds when every worker can be paid enough to care for his or her family, when every child can move forward with a good education, and when every American can retire in dignity. America works best when we look out for each other and work together as one nation, indivisible. (Messaging via Center for Community Change).

Q:  Why are “poor people” so dependent on government assistance?

A:  Public structures like Social Security, Medicaid, and Head Start have empowered millions of Americans to get back on track after hardships, retire in dignity, and move from poverty to prosperity. That’s especially important now, with our economy so far out of whack for everyday people. When corporations don’t have to pay people a decent wage, when millions of young people don’t have access to a good education, and when retirement savings can’t keep up with rising costs and stagnant wages, we need public structures that keep the doors to opportunity open for everyone in our country.

Q:  Why are so many “poor people” African-American or Latinx?

A:  It’s important to have an accurate picture of poverty in the United States. Many different kinds of people in this country are living on the brink. Nearly twice as many white people live in poverty as African-American people, and almost 1.5 times the number of white people are living in poverty as Latinx people. All of these communities are facing barriers to economic stability, and it’s in our interest and power to remove these barriers so that we all have an opportunity to care for our families and have a decent life.

Q:  Aren’t there other ways to reduce poverty, like through job creation?

A:  Reclaiming the promise of opportunity means demanding an economy that works for everyone, not just large corporations. Robust employment opportunity is important, but even at a 4.9% unemployment rate, 43 million of us are still living in poverty. We need to work together to shore up programs like Social Security, food assistance, and job training initiatives so that we all have the opportunity to live economically stable lives.

For additional communications advice or information on anti-poverty work, we recommend:

​

Quick Tips for Talking Immigration Issues

The immigration experience, one of moving from a familiar home to an uncertain future, is based on hope and opportunity. While recent attacks on immigrants and the concept are dispiriting, to say the least, they can’t defeat that hope and opportunity. Those values have pushed us forward as a nation built, in part, on the experience of newcomers who have made their way here to share their unique perspectives, skills, and cultures. As a result, we are a country that values the contributions and participation of people from diverse backgrounds. We have to continue to connect to those core values, and protect them against those seeking to exclude and divide. Here are five quick tips for talking about immigration in the face of these attacks so that we can tell a story that is forward-looking, full of hope, and that celebrates opportunity for all.

  1. Lead with values. “This is about the kind of country we want to be, how we treat people, what it really means to be American.” We need to push these conversations beyond specific executive orders or legislation and ensure that they’re centered on our core beliefs and our value system. Persuadable audiences can hear arguments for policy reform much more clearly when we link it to these all-important values.
  2. Talk common sense. Recent executive orders and proposed legislation reflect backward thinking and won’t serve us into the future. Instead, we need a commonsense approach that takes into account our values, our economic needs, and our future. Point out that vitriol, political division, and a desire to exclude people shouldn’t have any place in our approach to immigration policy.
  3. It’s about all of us. Standing up for what’s right is about more than immigrants’ rights, or workers, or Latinos. Rejecting bad policies is the right thing to do for everyone.
  4. Tell an affirmative story. There are a lot of misguided communications, skewed arguments and outright lies in current discourse. But too much focus on correcting wrong information can just reinforce it in audiences’ minds. So resist the temptation to bust all the myths out there, and just tell people what is true.
  5. Emphasize contribution and participation. We have to reject policies that would make contribution and participation very difficult for some people. We all thrive when we all participate, gearing up our economic engine and moving us all forward together.

Talking About the Muslim Ban

On Monday, June 26, the U.S. Supreme Court allowed portions of President Trump’s Muslim ban to go into effect, continued to prohibit other portions from going forward, and agreed to fully consider the constitutionality of the ban this fall.

The High Court has not ruled on the constitutionality of the ban, but has let parts of it go forward while it considers the ban’s legality.  It’s important to call out why the ban’s religious discrimination is not only unlawful but bad for our nation. We hope the following quick tips, based on communications research, experience, and input from partners around the country, helps with this task as we all move forward.

Building a Message – Value, Problem, Solution, Action

Values

Communications research shows that audiences are more receptive to new arguments when they are framed by shared values. For the Muslim ban, there are three sets of recurring values that we want to keep at the center of the conversation:

1) Our Core National Values

Remind people of the kind of country we want to be, drawing on our best ideals. For some audiences, describing times in our history when  we have done the right thing is inspiring.

Values: Opportunity, freedom, justice, our founding legal documents.

We see tonight what I believe is a clear violation of the Constitution, and so clearly tonight we have to commit ourselves to the longer fight. Clearly tonight, we have to commit ourselves to the cause of our country. Clearly tonight, we have to be determined to show this world what America is all about.”

– Senator Cory Booker

Trump’s actions are hurting Netflix employees around the world, and are so un-American it pains us all…It is time to link arms together to protect American values of freedom and opportunity.”

– Netflix CEO Reed Hastings

A nation founded with the promise of religious freedom. This nation wants to ban Muslim immigrants? ‪#NoBanNoWall”

– Franchesca Ramsey, Youtuber

2) Our Moral Responsibility

Remind audiences of our responsibilities to our fellow humans and how we must rise above fear and xenophobia to find our “better angels” as Abraham Lincoln once said. We share responsibility for one another and for protecting and uplifting human rights.

Values: Empathy, compassion community.

America is better when we lead with freedom, not fear. We cannot allow fear to dictate our decisions. We must act with requisite caution, but also with compassion and moral clarity.

– National Immigration Forum

We need to protect all our brothers and sisters of all faiths, including Muslims, who have lost family, home and country.

– Bishop Joe S Vásquez, US Conference of Catholic Bishops

Even though Dory gets into America, she ends up separated from her family, but the other animals help Dory. Animals that don’t even need her. Animals that don’t have anything in common with her. They help her, even though they’re completely different colors. Because that’s what you do when you see someone in need – you help them.

– Ellen DeGeneres, using the plot from her film Finding Dory to comment on the border wall.

3) Our “Can-do” Spirit

Audiences are hungry for solutions in times like these. We have to remember to highlight what we want moving forward – and how we can get there – in addition to pointing out what we’re against. Sympathetic audiences need to be primed to feel proud of our country’s capacity to accommodate all kinds of people, and our history of providing opportunity for those seeking it. Those in our base need to hear forward-leaning messages about  working together to counter, demolish, and replace bad policies.

Values: Pragmatism, common sense, innovation, determination to do the right thing, our shared responsibility to fix flawed policies, solidarity

It doesn’t make sense to spend billions of dollars of taxpayer money on something that is really not necessary. This is a 15th century solution to a nonexistent problem. We need a 21st century, common-sense border policy that upholds the dignity of our border residents.

– Vicki Gaubeca, Director, ACLU New Mexico Regional Center for Border Rights, New Mexico.

I think this is a problem that will need diplomatic solutions, political solutions, military solutions, educational, social, and other solutions. So, this is a problem that is multi-faceted and therefore requires a multi-faceted solution. Muslims are an integral part of that solution.

-Dr. Khalid Qazi, Muslim Public Affairs Council of Western New York.

There is something more important and powerful than all three branches of government. It is you – the people.

– New York City Mayor Bill DeBlasio in support of protesters.

Problem

Frame problems as threats to our shared values. This is the place to pull out stories and statistics that are likely to resonate with the target audience. But choose facts carefully. We all have a lot of evidence to support our claims. However, facts do not tend to change minds if the facts are not couched in values.

We vehemently oppose any proposal or statements calling for a ban on refugees, as well as discrimination based on religion or nationality. As a nation founded in part by refugees and immigrants, these kind of discriminatory policies dishonor our history, beliefs and values.

– Welcoming America

[The Muslim ban is] a stunning violation of our deepest American values, the values of a nation of immigrants: fairness, equality, openness, generosity, courage… As an immigrant and the child of refugees, I join them, with deep feeling, in believing that the policies announced Friday tear at the very fabric of our society.

– Massachusetts Institute of Technology president L. Rafael Reif.

Solution

Pivot quickly to solutions. Positive solutions leave people with choices, ideas, and motivation. They are the hero of the story and rescue the values at stake. In the case of this Muslim ban, our existing laws and their enforcement, our resiliency, and our values will all point us in the right direction when it comes to solutions.

Restricting a religion… is as short-sighted as it is immoral. More intelligent would be to increase resources dedicated to regional refugee process centers so security checks occur in timely fashion.”

– National Immigration Forum

The United States is a nation governed by the rule of law and not the iron will of one man. President Trump now has learned that we are a democratic republic where the powers of government are not dictatorial. They are limited. The courts are the bulwark of our democracy that protects individual rights and guards against the overreaching of an administration that confuses its will for the American public’s.”

– American Civil Liberties Union

Action

Assign an action. What can this specific target audience do? Try to give them something concrete that they can picture themselves doing: making a phone call, sending an email. Steer clear of vague “learn more” messages, when possible. For people who have only recently become active due to the events of the past few months, it is particularly important to be explicit about action. Include specific steps and assurances that they can help make a difference by following through.

Additional Tips

Balance Individual Stories with System-Wide Solutions

Storytelling features, at its core, heroes and heroines who bring issues such as immigration to life, so stories about individual triumph and tragedy are an obvious component. However, without sufficient context, audiences can limit a story’s implication to the individual level, attributing successes and failures to personal responsibilities and actions that have little to do with the system-level change we are seeking in our immigration policies.

Telling Affirmative Stories

We’re all faced with misleading, inaccurate, and untruthful statements about our issues. And we certainly can’t allow misinformation to go unchallenged. But the best way to counter false information is to tell our affirmative story in ways that overcome the other side’s falsehoods. By contrast, we should avoid myth busting, or restating the false argument and then explaining why it’s wrong.

In fact, repeating misinformation, even to refute it, can cause audiences to remember it better, but not necessarily remember that it was wrong. This is particularly true when information is stated in the affirmative, as happens with the “Myth/Fact” format of disputing untruths, for example: “Myth: The flu vaccine can sometimes cause the flu. Fact: The flu vaccine does not cause the flu.” The better approach is to proactively put forward what is true. “The flu vaccine prevents the flu.” Or “This order assumes that refugees don’t already go through a comprehensive vetting system, but they do.” A better approach: “Refugees undergo months of vetting and interviews before they are considered for entry into the U.S. And perhaps as a result, rates of unlawful behavior among these groups is lower than among people who were born here. They are on average one of the most law-abiding groups of people you could hope for in your community.”

Messaging for Current Conversations

Recent executive orders pose grave threats to our communities and our values. As we organize to counter, undo, and prevent further damage, strategic messaging is more important than ever. We hope the following quick tips, based on communications research, experience, and input from partners around the country, helps with this task as we all move forward.

Building a Message – Value, Problem, Solution, Action

Values

Communications research shows that audiences are more receptive to new arguments when they are framed by shared values. For recent Executive Orders, there are three sets of recurring values that we want to keep at the center of the conversation:

1) Our Core National Values
Remind people of the kind of country we want to be, drawing on our best ideals. For some audiences, describing times in our history when we have done the right thing is inspiring. Values: Opportunity, freedom, justice, our founding legal documents.

We see tonight what I believe is a clear violation of the Constitution, and so clearly tonight we have to commit ourselves to the longer fight. Clearly tonight, we have to commit ourselves to the cause of our country. Clearly tonight, we have to be determined to show this world what America is all about.

– Senator Cory Booker

Trump’s actions are hurting Netflix employees around the world, and are so un- American it pains us all…It is time to link arms together to protect American values of freedom and opportunity.

– Netflix CEO Reed Hastings

A nation founded with the promise of religious freedom. This nation wants to ban Muslim immigrants? #NoBanNoWall

– Franchesca Ramsey, Youtuber

2) Our Moral Responsibility
Remind audiences of our responsibilities to our fellow humans and how we must rise above fear and xenophobia to find our “better angels” as Abraham Lincoln once said. We share responsibility for one another and for protecting and uplifting human rights. Values: Empathy, compassion community.

America is better when we lead with freedom, not fear. We cannot allow fear to dictate our decisions. We must act with requisite caution, but also with compassion and moral clarity.

– National Immigration Forum

We need to protect all our brothers and sisters of all faiths, including Muslims, who have lost family, home and country.

– Bishop Joe S Vásquez, US Conference of Catholic Bishops

Even though Dory gets into America, she ends up separated from her family, but the other animals help Dory. Animals that don’t even need her. Animals that don’t have anything in common with her. They help her, even though they’re completely different colors. Because that’s what you do when you see someone in need – you help them.

– Ellen DeGeneres, using the plot from her film Finding Dory to comment on the border wall.

3) Our “Can-do” Spirit
Audiences are hungry for solutions in times like these. We have to remember to highlight what we want moving forward – and how we can get there – in addition to pointing out what we’re against. Sympathetic audiences need to be primed to feel proud of our country’s capacity to accommodate all kinds of people, and our history of providing opportunity for those seeking it. Those in our base need to hear forward-leaning messages about working together to counter, demolish, and replace bad policies. Values: Pragmatism, common sense, innovation, determination to do the right thing, our shared responsibility to fix flawed policies, solidarity

It doesn’t make sense to spend billions of dollars of taxpayer money on something that is really not necessary. This is a 15th century solution to a nonexistent problem. We need a 21st century, common-sense border policy that upholds the dignity of our border residents.

– Vicki Gaubeca, Director, ACLU New Mexico Regional Center for Border Rights, New Mexico.

I think this is a problem that will need diplomatic solutions, political solutions, military solutions, educational, social, and other solutions. So, this is a problem that is multi- faceted and therefore requires a multi-faceted solution. Muslims are an integral part of that solution.

– Dr. Khalid Qazi, Muslim Public Affairs Council of Western New York.

There is something more important and powerful than all three branches of government. It is you – the people.

 – New York City Mayor Bill DeBlasio in support of protesters.

Problem

Frame problems as threats to our shared values. This is the place to pull out stories and statistics that are likely to resonate with the target audience. But choose facts carefully. We all have a lot of evidence to support our claims. However, facts do not tend to change minds if the facts are not couched in values.

We vehemently oppose any proposal or statements calling for a ban on refugees, as well as discrimination based on religion or nationality. As a nation founded in part by refugees and immigrants, these kind of discriminatory policies dishonor our history, beliefs and values.

– Welcoming America

[The Muslim order is] a stunning violation of our deepest American values, the values of a nation of immigrants: fairness, equality, openness, generosity, courage… As an immigrant and the child of refugees, I join them, with deep feeling, in believing that the policies announced Friday tear at the very fabric of our society.

– Massachusetts Institute of Technology president L. Rafael Reif.

Solution

Pivot quickly to solutions. Positive solutions leave people with choices, ideas, and motivation. They are the hero of the story and rescue the values at stake. In the case of these Executive Orders, our existing laws and their enforcement, our resiliency, and our values will all point us in the right direction when it comes to solutions.

Restricting a religion… is as short-sighted as it is immoral. More intelligent would be to increase resources dedicated to regional refugee process centers so security checks occur in timely fashion.

– National Immigration Forum

The United States is a nation governed by the rule of law and not the iron will of one man. President Trump now has learned that we are a democratic republic where the powers of government are not dictatorial. They are limited. The courts are the bulwark of our democracy that protects individual rights and guards against the overreaching of an administration that confuses its will for the American public’s.

– American Civil Liberties Union

Action

Assign an action. What can this specific target audience do? Try to give them something concrete that they can picture themselves doing: making a phone call, sending an email. Steer clear of vague “learn more” messages, when possible. For people who have only recently become active due to the events of the past few months, it is particularly important to be explicit about action. Include specific steps and assurances that they can help make a difference by following through.

Additional Tips

Balance Individual Stories with System-Wide Solutions

Storytelling features, at its core, heroes and heroines who bring issues such as immigration to life, so stories about individual triumph and tragedy are an obvious component. However, without sufficient context, audiences can limit a story’s implication to the individual level, attributing successes and failures to personal responsibilities and actions that have little to do with the system-level change we are seeking in our immigration policies.

Tell Affirmative Stories

We’re all faced with misleading, inaccurate, and untruthful statements about our issues. And we certainly can’t allow misinformation to go unchallenged. But the best way to counter false information is to tell our affirmative story in ways that overcome the other side’s falsehoods. By contrast, we should avoid myth busting, or restating the false argument and then explaining why it’s wrong.

In fact, repeating misinformation, even to refute it, can cause audiences to remember it better, but not necessarily remember that it was wrong. This is particularly true when information is stated in the affirmative, as happens with the “Myth/Fact” format of disputing untruths, for example: “Myth: The flu vaccine can sometimes cause the flu. Fact: The flu vaccine does not cause the flu.” The better approach is to proactively put forward what is true. “The flu vaccine prevents the flu.” Or “This order assumes that refugees don’t already go through a comprehensive vetting system, but they do.” A better approach: “Refugees undergo months of vetting and interviews before they are considered for entry into the U.S. And perhaps as a result, rates of unlawful behavior among these groups is lower than among people who were born here. They are on average one of the most law-abiding groups of people you could hope for in your community.”

Ten Lessons for Talking About Criminal Justice Issues

​

Now, more than ever, our criminal justice system must keep all communities safe, foster prevention and rehabilitation, and ensure fair and equal justice. But in too many places, and in too many ways, our system is falling short of that mandate and with devastating consequences. The United States is saddled with an outdated, unfair, and bloated criminal justice system that drains resources and disrupts communities.

Below are ten tips for moving people to action on changing our criminal justice policies so that they focus on safety and fairness, and serve all communities well.

1. Consider Audience and Goals. In any communications strategy, it’s important to start with who you’re trying to reach and what you want them to do. In putting together messages, consider:

  • Who are you hoping to influence?
  • Narrowing down your target audience helps to refine your strategy.
  • What do you want them to do?

Determine the appropriate action for your strategy. Sometimes you may have direct access to decision makers and are working to change their minds. Other times you may have access to other people who influence the decision makers.

  • What do you know about their current thinking?
  • Look to public opinion research, social media scans, their own words, etc.
  • What do you want to change about that?
  • Consider the change in thinking that needs to happen to cause action.
  • Who do they listen to?

Identify the media they consume and the people who are likely to influence their thinking. This may be an opportunity to reach out to partners and allies to serve as spokespeople if they might carry more weight with certain audiences.

2. Lead with Values. Audiences connect with messages that reflect their values and articulate a better world. Research and experience shows that many strategic audiences connect with the following values when it comes to the goals of our criminal justice policies. We can introduce ideas about transforming the criminal justice system by talking about how policies do or don’t live up to and reflect these values.

  • Basic Rights/Human Rights – the guarantee of dignity and fairness we all deserve by virtue of our humanity. In our justice system, this means ensuring:
  • Equal Justice – the assurance that what you look like, the accent you have or how much money you make should not affect the treatment you receive in our justice system.
  • The provision of Due Process – a basic legal right that includes action based on evidence, a day in court, and a fair trial.
  • That we observe and protect our Founding Principles/The Constitution – the Bill of Rights outlines important rights and ideals that we should strive to uphold. While we have often fallen short of these ideals, they should still guide how we treat people.

Examples:

The Eighth Amendment’s protection of dignity reflects the Nation we have been, the Nation we are, and the Nation we aspire to be. This is to affirm that the Nation’s constant, unyielding purpose must be to transmit the Constitution so that its precepts and guarantees retain their meaning and force.1

– Justice Kennedy, Majority Opinion, Hall v. Florida

These are men and women … re-­‐enunciating a powerful message of freedom and equality during this newest phase of the continuing struggle to bring the United States’ practices into alignment with its core principles.

– Formerly Incarcerated and Convicted People’s Movement (FICPM)2

  • Community – the notion that we share responsibility for each other, and that opportunity is not only about personal success but about our success as a people. We are better off when everyone can contribute and participate. In relation to our criminal justice policies, this means ensuring:
  • Real safety and security – the chance to live in communities where our family and property are safe, where individuals also feel safe from the police, and where police feel safe while doing their jobs.
  • Prevention – commonsense programs and supports like real access to jobs, education, and comprehensive healthcare, including for mental health and substance abuse issues.
  • Voice – that we should all have a say in the decisions that affect us and our communities.
  • The opportunity for redemption and starting over so that individuals can contribute to and participate in our communities after making amends.

Example:

New York is a state of opportunity, where individuals from all backgrounds and circumstances are given a fair chance to pursue their goals… The work of this Council increases the ability of our fellow citizens with criminal convictions to contribute positively to their families and communities, which creates a fairer and safer New York.

–Governor Cuomo3

  • Pragmatism – taking a responsible approach to our criminal justice system to implement policies that are both effective and efficient. This means relying on:
  • Solutions – ideas we know will work, and will move us all forward.
  • American Ingenuity -­‐ the know-­‐how to fix what’s wrong with our criminal justice system.
  • Common Sense –It’s time to take practical steps and stop wasting resources.

Example:

[We work] with Californians from all walks of life to replace prison and justice system waste with common sense solutions that create safe neighborhoods and save public dollars. [We are] bringing together business and community leaders, policymakers, law enforcement, health professionals, educators and crime-­‐prevention experts to replace costly, old ways of doing business with new justice priorities that improve public safety without draining resources from our schools, hospitals and other community needs.

– Californians for Safety and Justice.4

3. Share your vision. Outline a transformative vision of what the criminal justice system should be and what our policies should achieve: Invest in safe communities, ensure equal treatment that upholds the Constitution, reduce the effect of social harms, hold people accountable, and also give them a chance to start over.

  • When critiquing the current system, it’s important to include a big picture of what a transformative system means to communities, safety, and justice.
  • Removing what’s wrong isn’t enough and may leave audiences wondering how we should enforce laws and hold people accountable. Without an alternative vision to turn to, some audiences may feel too comfortable sticking with the status quo.
  • Whether you are talking about small changes or a vast overhaul, it’s equally important to share your big picture thinking so that audiences understand the steps that are needed to end up at a system that ensures both justice and safety.

Examples:

[We] envision a just society in which the use and regulation of drugs are grounded in science, compassion, health and human rights, in which people are no longer punished for what they put into their own bodies but only for crimes committed against others, and in which the fears, prejudices and punitive prohibitions of today are no more.

– The Drug Policy Alliance5

We offer an alternative moral vision of a justice system that operates in … accord with our values …. This vision includes the presumption of innocence, fair judicial proceedings, the merciful restoration of those who have broken the law, the renunciation of torture and other abusive practices, and a fundamental commitment to the dignity and humane treatment of everyone in our society….

– Unitarian Universalist Association6

4. Redefine the idea of safety. Everyone wants to be safe in their homes and in their communities. If people don’t feel safe, they feel fear, a sentiment that has been exploited for decades by “tough on crime” advocates. Yet we know that many of the policies enacted during this time do not actually lead to real safety. We need to tell a full story of the factors and policies that create truly safe communities.

  • Start by reminding audiences what communities really need, beyond the enforcement of laws, to be safe. There are a number of important factors necessary to meeting this goal, ranging from community cohesiveness and economic stability to laws that protect people’s rights and property. The criminal justice system is part of the equation, but its role is currently overemphasized at the expense of other equally or more important factors.
  • Emphasize themes like prevention, supporting practical programs like expanding access to mental health treatment and alternatives to imprisonment, collaborative approaches to policing, and restorative justice that keep all communities safe and uphold our values of equal justice and accountability.
  • Show how our current system is outdated, unfair and bloated; it drains resources and disrupts communities, none of which keeps us safe.

Examples:

Criminal justice is strong medicine: it can help, but applied too heavily or in the wrong way, it can hurt. It’s now clear that too much incarceration, aggressive, disrespectful policing, and other missteps can damage individuals, families, and communities and undermine relationships between neighborhoods and law enforcement. Law enforcement should do its work in ways that do not cause that harm.

–National Network for Safe Communities7

We hope that the nation will adopt the strategy that emphasizes opportunity rather than punishment as the guiding theme of our vision for public safety.

–The Sentencing Project8

5. Emphasize priorities and pragmatism. Research indicates the importance of emphasizing societal priorities: the idea that we make choices about how we invest our resources, and those decisions should reflect our values and needs.

  • Talk about a “responsible approach” to making the country safer, and about how we should best allocate resources. For instance, prioritizing prevention and rehabilitation is a common sense and responsible approach while needlessly incarcerating millions because of inflexible sentencing policies is not.9
  • Give examples of what works. Put forward achievable shorter-­‐term goals and solutions, then show how they support the larger vision.
  • Note that this is slightly different than a “cost effectiveness” argument that revolves around money only. A pragmatic argument about priorities emphasizes the overarching approach including, but not limited to, economic considerations.

Example:

Incarceration is costly. It can be done better. What we have to always ask, as Americans and as leaders, is what can we do better? How can we look at the issue and figure out how we can change it? We don’t need to incarcerate everyone. There are some individuals we do need to incarcerate, but there may be another way, and we know what it is. And we see those best practices in places like Texas and Kansas and other places that have used the Justice Reinvestment Initiative to work. 

–Sen. Lena Taylor (D-­‐Milwaukee) on “Tell Me More,” NPR News

6. Highlight Alternatives and Solutions. We know that one size solution doesn’t fit all when it comes to holding people accountable, but too often we rely solely on imprisonment as a solution. We need alternatives.

  • Talk about how our current justice system doesn’t take into account so many of the realities of today’s complex world. Our criminal justice system should focus on reducing the harms of addiction, mental illness, and poverty, rather than exacerbating them.
  • Outline alternatives to harsh sentences, particularly those related to young people, people with mental health issues, and those who have been convicted of less serious crimes. (Do this to show that there are many options available, not to create unnecessary divides or to abandon groups who are most difficult to talk about, such as those who have been convicted of violent crimes.)
  • Underscore that the criminal justice system is not, and should not be considered, the solution for many of the problems facing our communities. We have the know-­‐how to address the real issues without funneling people needlessly into a system that is not living up to our values.
  • Avoid unnecessary divisions. Audiences tend to be most supportive of alternatives to incarceration for young people, people suffering from mental illness, and people whose offenses did not involve violence. There is also rising support for decriminalization and legalization of some drugs. But in arguing for these reforms, we should avoid undermining support for less popular reforms and populations. For example, don’t emphasize reform for “non-­‐violent offenses” when it’s unnecessary to make that distinction.

Examples:

Each person who commits a crime is unique, and prison or jail time may not always be the most effective response. If courts have options other than incarceration, they can better tailor a cost-­‐effective sentence that fits the person and the crime, protects the public, and provides rehabilitation.

– Families Against Mandatory Minimums10

What you have to do is look at who’s going to the prison system in the first place, and about 70 percent of the people who go into prisons have a substance abuse problem. So instead of sending those people with substance abuse problems into the prison system, if we instead did a better job of providing substance abuse treatment to them in the communities, fewer of them would end [up] interfacing with the criminal justice system in the first place.

– Jeffrey Beard, California Secretary of Corrections on “Weekend Edition,” NPR

7. Discuss the importance of racial equity and equal justice. Experience shows that most criminal justice problems cannot be truly fixed without addressing questions of race. In this era of social movements, moreover, effectively discussing racial justice can help mobilize an active base of supporters.

  • Understand that negative racial stereotypes and implicit bias are often an unspoken reality in conversations about crime and punishment. Properly raising them through an appeal to move positive conscious values is often the only way to overcome their effect.
  • Instead of leading with evidence of unequal outcomes alone—which can sometimes reinforce stereotypes and blame—we recommend documenting how people of color frequently face harsh and unequal treatment by the criminal justice system. Provide concrete examples of these barriers.
  • Know that some audiences are skeptical about whether racial bias still exists in America, and believe (or want to believe) that the criminal justice system treats everyone fairly. We therefore need to be specific about the mechanisms that lead to unequal treatment, gather comprehensive and reliable data, and prepare a stable of examples to make a convincing and compelling argument.

Example:

Black youth are arrested for drug crimes at a rate ten times higher than that of whites. But new research shows that young African Americans are actually less likely to use drugs and less likely to develop substance use disorders, compared to whites, Native Americans, Hispanics and people of mixed race.

– Time Magazine11

8. Lift up and respect the voices and perspectives of people more directly affected by the system. People who have been caught up in the criminal justice system, who have been convicted of crimes, and who are emerging from prison or jail have an important perspective on the ways the system needs to change. They are key leaders and communicators on these issues. It’s important to not talk of “making room at the table” or “including voices,” but sincerely understanding the role they play in the criminal justice reform movement and to ensure their voices are a central part of the narrative we put into the world.

  • If your campaign or coalition hasn’t already, partner with an organization that focuses on building leadership among people who have been in prison or jail. Understand how messages work or don’t for them and find ways to expand spokesperson opportunities so that audiences also understand the importance of their voices.
  • Point out that those affected are key, and often missing, spokespeople for the movement.

Example:

We believe what has been missing from the discussion is an ingredient that is included in every civil rights movement within the United States, every movement, which is leadership from people it impacts, the voices of people who have been most impacted by the system being elevated and being allowed to speak out about how the system has affected them. Seventy million people have a criminal record on file, but where are those voices? Where are those leaders?

– Glenn E. Martin, Executive Director, Just Leadership USA12

9. Use the right metaphors. Frameworks Institute suggests using explanatory metaphors they term “justice gears” and mazes to help to explain the complexities of the current criminal justice system and move audiences to fix it. In their report Mazes and Gears: Using Explanatory Metaphors to Increase Public Understanding of the Criminal Justice System and its Reform, the organization’s Nathaniel Kendall-­‐Taylor explains that these metaphors help audiences understand systemic problems and solutions and emphasize that a one-­‐size-­‐fits-­‐all approach is not workable or efficient when it comes to criminal justice issues.

Examples:

Right now our justice system is stuck using only one gear – the prison gear. Think about how a bicycle needs to use different gears for different situations to work effectively and efficiently. The criminal justice system is trying to deal with a wide variety of situations using only the prison gear. We need to have other justice gears for people who come into the system, like mental health or juvenile justice services. We need to change the criminal justice system to make sure it has different gears for different purposes and that it can use the right gear in the right situation. If we do use more justice gears, we can improve outcomes and all get where we need to go.

Even in the most difficult mazes, there’s a way to get in and out. But the criminal justice system is designed without enough paths that come out of the maze. A lot of people, no matter where they come into the criminal justice system, get on a path that goes straight to prison and has no way out. We know that other routes, such as those to mental health services, addiction services or juvenile justice services, must be made available. These must be two-­‐way paths so that people can get to where they need to go. We need to redesign the justice maze with clear multiple routes so that people can get where they need to go in the most effective and efficient way possible.13

For a full explanation and examples of the use of these metaphors, go to http://www.frameworksinstitute.org/assets/files/pscj_metaphors.pdf.

10. Use Individual Stories Carefully and Strategically. When telling stories about people who have been involved in the criminal justice system, or when telling your own story, it’s critical to remember a few points about balance. While these stories are crucial to building public support, and important to tell, we must do this carefully to avoid some common pitfalls of telling stories about individual experiences.

  • When including people’s stories, be aware of audiences’ tendencies to over-­‐ focus on individual success and failure. Examine each story to ensure that it can transcend that focus and bring audiences to systemic and policy solutions that we all are responsible to enact. Make sure all the stories you include connect to support the larger vision.
  • Talk about people, not labels, when sharing individual stories. For example, instead of “juvenile offender” or “inmate,” talk about “young person in detention,” someone who has “committed crimes in the past,” “emerging from prison” or, in context, “a returning citizen.”
  • Emphasize growth and redemption -­‐-­‐ the idea that people grow and change over time, and that we all deserve a chance to start over after missteps or misfortune.
  • Make sure that spokespeople understand and are fully prepared, are offered appropriate support for the potential emotional and legal consequences of sharing their personal stories, and have access to legal and other resources.

Examples:

I don’t want my country to tell any child that he or she is irredeemable. It sounds so obvious to say that you aren’t the same person you were when you were a kid, but I saw people in prison who were punished forever as if they’d never be more than the worst thing they had done as a kid -­‐-­‐ as if, no matter what, they’d never change or be worthy of the chance to prove they might deserve release.

– Jason Baldwin, one of the West Memphis 3 14

Mr. Owino, 37-­‐years-­‐old, has been in immigration detention since 2005 with no bond, nearly a decade after he completed his sentence for his crime. … Mr. Owino’s detention is emblematic of how arbitrary mandatory detention is in our broken immigration system. Mandatory detention violates the international human rights law prohibition against arbitrary and indefinite detention. It imposes an additional punishment on individuals who have already paid their debt to society, one which is often harsher because -­‐-­‐ unlike criminal incarceration -­‐-­‐ there is no definite release date.

– Families for Freedom15

1. Supreme Court decisions database

2. KFFI, Formerly Incarcerated and Convicted People’s Movement

3. New Yorker, Governor Cuomo Announces Executive Action to Reduce Barriers to Employment

4. Safe and Just website

5. Drug Policy Project website

6. Unitarian Univeralist Church Policy on Criminal Justice

7. The National Network for Safe Communities Mission

8. Sentencing Project, How to Build a Better Criminal Justice System

9. Simon, A. F., & Gilliam, F. D. (2013). Framing and Facts: Necessary Synergies in Communicating About Public Safety and Criminal Justice. Frameworks Institute.

10. Families Against Mandatory Minimums; Alternatives in a Nutshell

11. Time Magazine, Whites for Likely to Abuse Drugs than Blacks

12. The Atlantic, April 2014. Will Rikers Be Closed?

13. Kendall-­‐Taylor, N. (2013). Mazes and Gears: Using Explanatory Metaphors to Increase Public Understanding of the Criminal Justice System and its Reform. Frameworks Institute.

14. Huffington Post, July 6, 2012; Kids Shouldn’t Face Dying in Prison

15. Families for Freedom press release on Kenyan Torture Survivor

​

SCOTUS Decision in Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin

On June 23, 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a decision in Fisher v. University of Texas, upholding the University of Texas’s consideration of racial diversity in its admissions process. In a 4-3 decision, the Court held that carefully crafted admissions policies that consider racial diversity as one factor in creating a well-rounded student body are constitutional under the Equal Protection Clause.

This is a major victory for universities, students, and our nation. In communicating about the case, our messaging should promote the importance of diversity policies to the country, make clear that the decision is consistent with Court precedent in upholding the compelling state interest in diversity, and praise the majority’s recognition of the educational benefits of diversity. After reviewing the justices’ decisions, it may also be appropriate to critique the dissenting opinion as a short-sighted interpretation that would have held our increasingly diverse nation back at a critical time.

More broadly, our communications about diversity policies and this decision should emphasize the following themes:

  • Expanding Opportunity: It’s in everyone’s interest to see that talented students from all backgrounds get a close look and a fair shot, and have the chance to overcome obstacles to educational opportunity.
  • The Benefits of Diversity: Learning with (and from) people from different backgrounds and perspectives benefits our students, our communities, our work force, our military and our country as a whole.
  • Preventing Racial Isolation: It is important that schools are able to build student bodies that foster meaningful diversity that does not isolate any one group.
  • Our National Interest: Fostering educational diversity and greater opportunity is critical to our nation’s future in a global economy and an increasingly interconnected world.
  • Broad Support: Diversity policies, and the UT policy in particular, are supported by a broad cross-section of American society, including military leaders, major corporations, small business owners, educators, and students from all backgrounds.

Core Messages

  • This is a victory for equal opportunity and the future of our nation. We are thrilled the Court ruled in favor of equal opportunity in higher education and recognized again that it is critical that schools remain able to create diverse and inclusive student bodies. It’s in our national interest that talented students from a variety of backgrounds get a close look and a fair chance at overcoming obstacles to higher education. Providing a diverse learning environment benefits students, our workforce, and the country as a whole.
  • Fostering diversity and expanding opportunity reaffirmed. The Fisher decision is another in a line of recent Supreme Court decisions that reaffirms the importance of diversity as a compelling state interest as settled law. The Court has again held that it is Constitutional for universities to craft carefully, narrowly tailored admissions plans designed to ensure the educational benefits of diversity for all students.
  • Universities, businesses and other institutions should recommit to expanding opportunity for all. UT’s plan is one that was carefully crafted to meet the goal of ensuring the educational benefits of diversity on its campus. Many students of color face obstacles to success, often without resources available to other students. When students do well despite those obstacles, universities should be able to offer them a chance to succeed. In this way, universities and all students benefit from the exchange of ideas and perspectives that diverse student bodies bring. We encourage America’s educational, business, and other institutions to engage in similar thoughtful and fair planning around ways to foster diverse participation.

Addressing Questions

When speaking to the press, remember that your goal is to get your message out, not to answer their questions. In addressing potentially divisive questions from reporters and others, we typically recommend responding briefly to the question and then pivoting back to your main point.

Q. Do universities have to revise their policies in light of this decision?

A: “Whenever there’s a Supreme Court decision on a higher education topic it’s wise for universities to take a look at their policies to make sure they comply, and this case is no different. We are confident that universities across the country will undertake a thoughtful, lawful process like the University of Texas did to create policies that ensure the educational benefits of diversity for all students.

Q: Does the Court’s opinion create a new legal standard for colleges and universities seeking to implement diversity admissions programs?

A: No. The Court reaffirmed the importance of diversity as a compelling state interest and upheld the use of race in a carefully crafted admissions plan designed to ensure the educational benefits of diversity for all students.

Q: Don’t these policies hurt Asian American students?

A: Asian Americans, like all students, benefit from an application process that considers all of each candidate’s qualities, including factors such as language spoken at home. Getting rid of affirmative action would hurt many Asian American applicants who continue to face educational barriers. Asian Americans also benefit from affirmative action because it enables them to learn in diverse environments with students of different backgrounds and perspectives. These benefits extend beyond the school environment, so that students of all races who become leaders, employers, and co-workers are better equipped to lead, interact with, and value the contributions of people of all races. Indeed, Asian Americans are themselves an extremely diverse group, from a range of economic backgrounds, experiences, and national origins. And like all of us, they both contribute to and benefit from the national diversity that helps make America.

Q: What does this mean for affirmative action cases in the pipeline?

A: This decision is one in a line of recent decisions that reaffirms the importance of diversity as a compelling state interest. We believe that universities that carefully craft their admissions plans to ensure the educational benefits of diversity for all will continue to be working within the bounds of the Constitution.

This document was prepared by The Opportunity Agenda, the Asian American Justice Center | AAJC, The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights/The Leadership Conference Education Fund, the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, and the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund.

close search

Hot Topics: