Is it legal for government to enforce affirmative action on political views in public universities?

[Skill and Chance]

1. Several states have political views/party membership as an explicit protected class under state civil rights laws.  If a DeSantis type governor got elected in one of those states and  wanted to aggressively bring "hostile environment" style civil rights cases on behalf of conservative students and student groups subject to protests, etc, they presumably could.  Also, these political discrimination laws are usually explicitly applied to private institutions/employers as well. 

2. In a state that doesn't have political views as a protected class but does have party registration, I think there would be nothing stopping a legislature from requiring that public institutions select faculty and students so that party registration at the state university matches statewide party registration?  Even in an open primary state, they could try to do this based on R vs. D primary turnout, because which primary someone voted in is a public record.  However, this would be aggressively gamed.  If you know that UT Austin or the University of Florida is now required to admit and hire more registered Republicans/Republican primary voters than Democrats because statewide Republican registration/turnout is higher, well, there's going to be a lot more "Republicans."  Quite possibly enough to defeat conservative candidates in the primary!

3.  A conservative legislature concerned about this issue could change state law or propose an amendment to the state constitution to require confirmation votes in the state legislature for university administrators, admissions officers, and candidates for tenure at public institutions.  This would seem to be the most direct way of moving the needle.  However, it's easily attacked as "replacing academic freedom with a fascist spoils system" or the like.  It would objectively be hilarious though if Scott Walker became the next president of UW Madison or Ted Cruz became the next dean of UT Law. 

[Skill and Chance]

I don't believe conservative students have any advantage in the law school admissions process (it is, if anything, a disadvantage). The "affirmative action" line comes from post-graduation clerkships with judges, which are much easier to get if you're a conservative given the ideological composition of most law schools vs that of the federal judiciary.

Interesting.  I believe there is something of a tradition of appeals level judges intentionally hiring one opposite ideology clerk to strengthen their arguments?

[Skill and Chance]

1. Several states have political views/party membership as an explicit protected class under state civil rights laws.  If a DeSantis type governor got elected in one of those states and  wanted to aggressively bring "hostile environment" style civil rights cases on behalf of conservative students and student groups subject to protests, etc, they presumably could.  Also, these political discrimination laws are usually explicitly applied to private institutions/employers as well. 

2. In a state that doesn't have political views as a protected class but does have party registration, I think there would be nothing stopping a legislature from requiring that public institutions select faculty and students so that party registration at the state university matches statewide party registration?  Even in an open primary state, they could try to do this based on R vs. D primary turnout, because which primary someone voted in is a public record.  However, this would be aggressively gamed.  If you know that UT Austin or the University of Florida is now required to admit and hire more registered Republicans/Republican primary voters than Democrats because statewide Republican registration/turnout is higher, well, there's going to be a lot more "Republicans."  Quite possibly enough to defeat conservative candidates in the primary!

3.  A conservative legislature concerned about this issue could change state law or propose an amendment to the state constitution to require confirmation votes in the state legislature for university administrators, admissions officers, and candidates for tenure at public institutions.  This would seem to be the most direct way of moving the needle.  However, it's easily attacked as "replacing academic freedom with a fascist spoils system" or the like.  It would objectively be hilarious though if Scott Walker became the next president of UW Madison or Ted Cruz became the next dean of UT Law. 

This is also what I was thinking. In term of constitution and Federal law, it seems perfectly legal to affirmative action on political views. But why they haven't done that?

Perhaps out of concern that it would legally entrench other forms of affirmative action they oppose?   Or they live in states subject to #1 (where it would presumably be as unconstitutional to set party quotas as it would be to set ethnicity quotas)?  Possibly, but less likely, there could also be fear of a flood of campus "Republicans" leading to conservative primary losses?

Several red states are flirting with #3 now.

[Skill and Chance]

Using ideology or party registration as a quota mechanism surely violates the First Amendment. It also is an utterly horrific idea.

It also would lead it dissembling. Hey, Boalt Hall, I am a Federalist Society MAGA Pub, so you have to let me in to fill that quota! Yes, last year I was a Dem, but that was just my socialist phase. You know, when young to be a conservative means you have no heart, while when adult, to be a socialist means you have no brain. I become an adult this year. And I can write as well as Churchill to boot. Just saying.

Yes, this is the issue.  You get flooded with fake R's, and then maybe eventually fake D's at some point down the line. 

To me, only my 3rd point is really worth pursuing if you're concerned about this issue.  Let the legislature appoint the public university administrators, and maybe also require a legislative "confirmation vote" for state university professors up for tenure.