Arkansas Moves Away From Racial Quotas, Raising Questions About Representation

Racial quotas have long been a flashpoint in political debate in the United States. Supporters argue that they help ensure representation for historically marginalized groups, while critics contend that they amount to unconstitutional discrimination. In Arkansas, that debate has played out for decades. Democratic administrations in the late twentieth century supported such policies. In the twenty-first century, however, successive state governments have steadily moved away from race based requirements in public appointments that were established by earlier administrations.

That shift reached a decisive moment last week, when a federal judge struck down the final remaining racial quota for a state board. State officials chose not to defend the requirement and instead aligned with the private plaintiff who challenged it, signaling the position of the current administration. The ruling effectively ends race based appointment mandates in Arkansas state government. Republicans have described the change as a return to merit and qualifications, while critics argue it could further diminish minority representation in a largely conservative state.

The Final Racial Quota

The racial quota for the Arkansas Ethics Commission dates back to a 1991 initiated act that created the five member body. Because the commission was established by a vote of the people, the legislature could not remove the requirement without a two thirds majority. That structure likely explains why the quota remained in place longer than similar provisions in other states.

Each of the five seats on the commission is filled by a different appointing authority. One member is appointed by the governor, while the remaining four appointments are made by the lieutenant governor, the speaker of the House, the Senate president pro tempore, and the attorney general.

When commission member Miguel Lopez’s term ended last summer, state law required that his replacement also be of a minority race, since Lopez was the only nonwhite member of the commission at the time. Attorney General Tim Griffin declined to appoint a replacement under those conditions, refusing to comply with the racial quota. As a result, Lopez has continued serving on the commission beyond the end of his term.

Former University of Arkansas professor Jay Greene, who is white and sought a seat on the commission, filed a lawsuit in October challenging the law requiring that one member of the Arkansas Ethics Commission be of a minority race. Greene’s attorneys said he had previously submitted his name for consideration. However, because the statute mandated that one seat be reserved for a minority member, Greene was disqualified solely on the basis of his race when the vacancy arose.

“It’s just a straightforward racial quota,” said Caleb Trotter, a senior attorney with the Pacific Legal Foundation, who represented Greene. “And the Supreme Court has said that essentially the government can’t do that.”

Greene’s lawsuit quickly became the vehicle for testing that principle in Arkansas. Griffin, meanwhile, had been waiting for the lawsuit.

State Officials Side With the Plaintiff

Last week, state officials with appointment authority took the unusual step of siding with the plaintiff who was suing them. All five appointing officials filed a joint motion with Greene, asking the court to declare the racial quota unconstitutional under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

“Traditionally, you would have either a trial or briefs and then the court makes a decision weighing both arguments,” Trotter said. “But here we had all five state officials agreeing with our position that this racial quota for the Ethics Commission is unconstitutional.”

The following day, the court permanently eliminated the racial quota.

“No longer does the attorney general or any other state official have to consider someone’s race in making these appointments,” Trotter said. “And that’s a great day for the Constitution. It’s a great day for equality under the law and for all Arkansans.”

It looks like a mission accomplished. 

Concerns From Within the Commission

By choosing not to make an appointment under the existing requirement, state leaders paved the way for dismantling the race based quota by allowing it to be challenged in court. Attorney General Tim Griffin’s decision not to appoint a replacement puzzled then Ethics Commission director Graham Sloan, who questioned the logic of undoing a system that had operated for decades without controversy.

“The people of the state of Arkansas said they wanted a five member board and that they wanted certain people to be represented, certain groups to be represented on that board,” Sloan told KATV in June. “It’s never proven to be a problem for the commission. You know, and I’ve been here more than 25 years and there’s never been a problem.”

Sloan also emphasized the demographic rationale behind the requirement.

“Minorities constitute 20 percent of the Arkansas population,” he said. “And so a law that would say that there’ll be one member of a minority race on the board, you know, it gives that 20 percent of the population. It gives them representation on the board.”

Political Reaction and Public Debate

The ruling and the state government’s actions have drawn criticism from Democrats and left leaning advocates, who argue that racial quotas are an essential tool for ensuring minority representation in a predominantly white state and a core part of broader social justice efforts.

In media commentary following the court’s decision, some critics warned that the outcome would mean “another part of state government will always be controlled by old white men,” underscoring the intensity of opposition to the change.

Opponents of racial quotas, however, have long argued that seats on boards and commissions should be filled based on experience and qualifications rather than race.

Despite the backlash, Attorney General Tim Griffin’s office has made clear that the state intends to move forward without race based requirements. Jeff LeMaster, a spokesman for the attorney general’s office, said Griffin plans to announce a new appointment to the Ethics Commission soon. With the quota eliminated, Griffin is no longer required to consider race in making the appointment, effectively closing the chapter on quota based selection for the commission and, more broadly, for Arkansas state boards. The debate, however, is unlikely to end.