Edward Blum's Legal Activism

Aug 11, 2025

Overview

This podcast episode revisits and updates the story of Edward Blum, a key activist challenging race-based policies through the US legal system, focusing on his latest lawsuits targeting affirmative action in university admissions.

Edward Blum’s Background and Motivation

  • Blum was raised in a liberal household but gradually shifted to conservative beliefs through exposure to neoconservative ideas.
  • His involvement in politics began after noticing a lack of Republican candidates in his Houston district, prompting an unsuccessful congressional run.
  • During his campaign, he observed racially gerrymandered districts, which led him to challenge the constitutionality of redistricting.

Legal Campaigns Against Race-Based Policies

  • Blum filed and won a Supreme Court case against Texas’s racially gerrymandered districts, beginning his career as a legal activist.
  • He helped initiate numerous lawsuits targeting race-based policies in congressional redistricting, school admissions, and city contracting.
  • His most significant victory was the 2013 Shelby County v. Holder case, which struck down key provisions of the Voting Rights Act.

Shift to Affirmative Action in Education

  • After Shelby County, Blum targeted affirmative action in university admissions, notably with the Fisher v. University of Texas case, which he lost.
  • He then founded Students for Fair Admissions to challenge Harvard and UNC, alleging discrimination against Asian American applicants.

Recent Lawsuits and Strategies

  • Blum actively recruited plaintiffs through targeted websites and ensured their anonymity to protect them from potential harassment.
  • The Harvard case focuses on alleged penalties for high-achieving Asian American students, citing stagnant admission percentages despite increased applications.
  • He advocates ending race-based preferences in favor of socioeconomic-based admissions criteria.

Arguments and Counterpoints

  • Blum claims that ending racial preferences will reduce white admissions and increase Asian American representation.
  • He argues that legacy and donor preferences should also be abolished, supporting broader access for disadvantaged backgrounds.
  • Critics highlight weaknesses in his data sources and the broader societal implications of removing affirmative action.

Decisions

  • Continue challenging race-based admissions using Students for Fair Admissions.
  • Recruit only Asian American plaintiffs for the Harvard lawsuit due to their alleged disadvantage.

Action Items

  • TBD – Edward Blum/Students for Fair Admissions: Proceed with current lawsuits against Harvard, UNC, and potentially other universities.
  • TBD – Podcast Team: Provide follow-up materials and updates on the lawsuits on the show website.