Subscriber Benefit
As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe NowThe Supreme Court on Thursday struck down affirmative action in college admissions, forcing institutions of higher education to look for new ways to achieve diverse student bodies.
The court’s conservative majority overturned admissions plans at Harvard University and the University of North Carolina, the nation’s oldest private and public colleges, respectively.
Chief Justice John Roberts said that for too long universities have “concluded, wrongly, that the touchstone of an individual’s identity is not challenges bested, skills built, or lessons learned but the color of their skin. Our constitutional history does not tolerate that choice.”
Justice Clarence Thomas, the nation’s second Black justice who had long called for an end to affirmative action, wrote separately that the decision “sees the universities’ admissions policies for what they are: rudderless, race-based preferences designed to ensure a particular racial mix in their entering classes.”
Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote in dissent that the decision “rolls back decades of precedent and momentous progress.”
Both Thomas and Sotomayor took the unusual step of reading a summary of their opinions aloud in the courtroom.
In a separate dissent, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson—the court’s first Black female justice—called the decision “truly a tragedy for us all.”
The vote was 6-3 in the North Carolina case and 6-2 in the Harvard case. Jackson sat out the Harvard case because she had been a member of an advisory governing board there.
The Supreme Court had twice upheld race-conscious college admissions programs in the past 20 years, including as recently as 2016.
But that was before the three appointees of former President Donald Trump joined the court. At arguments in late October, all six conservative justices expressed doubts about the practice, which had been upheld under Supreme Court decisions reaching back to 1978.
Lower courts also had upheld the programs at both UNC and Harvard, rejecting claims that the schools discriminated against white and Asian American applicants.
The college admissions disputes are among several high-profile cases focused on race in America, and were weighed by the conservative-dominated, but most diverse court ever. Among the nine justices are four women, two Black people and a Latina.
The justices earlier in June decided a voting rights case in favor of Black voters in Alabama and rejected a race-based challenge to a Native American child protection law.
The affirmative action cases were brought by conservative activist Edward Blum, who also was behind an earlier affirmative action challenge against the University of Texas as well as the case that led the court in 2013 to end use of a key provision of the landmark Voting Rights Act.
Blum formed Students for Fair Admissions, which filed the lawsuits against both schools in 2014.
The group argued that the Constitution forbids the use of race in college admissions and called for overturning earlier Supreme Court decisions that said otherwise.
Blum’s group also contended that colleges and universities can use other, race-neutral ways to assemble a diverse student body, including by focusing on socioeconomic status and eliminating the preference for children of alumni and major donors.
The schools said that they use race in a limited way, but that eliminating it as a factor altogether would make it much harder to achieve a student body that looks like America.
At the eight Ivy League universities, the number of nonwhite students increased by 55% from 2010 to 2021, according to federal data. That group, which includes, Native American, Asian, Black, Hispanic, Pacific Islander and biracial students, accounted for 35% of students on those campuses in 2021, up from 27% in 2010.
The end of affirmative action in higher education in California, Michigan, Washington state and elsewhere led to a steep drop in minority enrollment in the states’ leading public universities.
They are among nine states that already prohibit any consideration of race in admissions to their public colleges and universities. The others are: Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Nebraska, New Hampshire and Oklahoma.
In 2020, California voters easily rejected a ballot measure to bring back affirmative action.
A poll last month by The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research showed 63% of U.S. adults say the court should allow colleges to consider race as part of the admissions process, yet few believe students’ race should ultimately play a major role in decisions. A Pew Research Center survey released last week found that half of Americans disapprove of considerations of applicants’ race, while a third approve.
The chief justice and Jackson received their undergraduate and law degrees from Harvard. Two other justices, Elena Kagan and Neil Gorsuch, went to law school there, and Kagan was the first woman to serve as the law school’s dean.
Every U.S. college and university the justices attended, save one, urged the court to preserve race-conscious admissions.
Those schools—Yale, Princeton, Columbia, Notre Dame and Holy Cross—joined briefs in defense of Harvard’s and UNC’s admissions plans.
Only Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s undergraduate alma mater, Rhodes College, in Memphis, Tennessee, was not involved in the cases.
Please enable JavaScript to view this content.
Sigh… Welcome back to the 1950’s. Are we MAGA yet?
Wasn’t the 1950s defined by race used as justification for social evil? By eliminating racist admissions standards, we are willing equal protection for all regardless of race.
Dan M.
This decision was the correct one.
This decision by the SCOTUS will benefit both Asian and black students.
The plaintiffs in this case were Asian American Groups.
Sad, sad commentary on our society. Must we erase all progress toward equality from the past 60 years??
This is the very definition of equality: eliminating racist admissions standards.
This is a huge win for equal protection! Equality for all!
What progress is there if black students have much lower grades and
much higher drop rates because the University put diversity & inclusion
over qualifications and ability????
We are all Americans. Why is this even a question? I decline to identify race on any form. We need to see beyond color of someone’s skin.
I wonder if Justices Thomas and Barrett will now resign. While they were no doubt excellent students and deserving of whatever they made of their lives, I don’t think there’s a lot of doubt neither would have made it to top law schools, and into the upper echelons of the legal world, but for affirmative action programs.
That’s not true at all, Tim. They’re brilliant legal thinkers, they would have been promoted regardless of race or sex.
I need an address for the bill to replace this computer, because I spit my drink all over it … Thomas got into Yale Law School as part of an affirmative action program in the 70’s and has been bitter about it ever since.
That said, Americans across the board have a long history of pulling the ladder up after them on issues of race and immigration and Thomas is just another such person.
No, DH, they would not have made it but for affirmative action programs. Did you never hear Sandra Day O’Connor or Sarah Evans Barker or any other female federal judge talk about their law school and post law school experiences pre- 1970s??? They were offered legal secretary positions. A black graduate of a liberal Jesuit Catholic University from a very low socio-economic background was going to Yale? He was going to be offered jobs in Missouri, become a legislative assistant to a US Senator, and made an Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights? Be appointed chair of the EEOC? You really believe that? Maybe you should take some time and learn what Colin Powell had to say about affirmative action and his career in the military. He knew very well that merit didn’t get past certain points; affirmative action got him where he ended up.
The republicans in the Indiana legislature must be so pleased. Systemic racism gets baked in even more. They planning a party? Drinks on Lucas?
Pat, eliminating racist admissions standards is eliminating systemic racism from admissions policies.
Sorry, Pat, you are on the wrong side of history. You should be celebrating Equal Protection.
Pat B.
What a lousy UNINFORMED cheat shot.
The case was brought by Asian American groups that were facing discrimination
at Harvard. Asian Americans that scored much higher and that were much more
qualified thanblack applicants were being denied admissions
This decision will benefit Asian Americans and African Americans both.
Many blacks that were not nearly as qualified suffered grade wise and had much
higher drop out rates.
When California ended their quotas or affirmative action programs, blacks
were attending universities that they were more qualified for. The result
blacks started graduating at much higher rates with higher grades.
While the plaintiffs in this case were Asian American, that was a charade. The person behind it was Edward J. Blum, a white conservative who is opposed to affirmative action. He formed a front group, Students for Fair Admissions, and recruited a slew of Asian and Caucasian students. The Asian students were the front for this. But it was Mr. Blum who made it happen. It was his cause, his association, his group’s money raised from fellow white conservatives. This is Mr. Blum’s victory, not the students. Long run, the Asian students will suffer. They won’t get in because African Americans aren’t getting in. It will revert to simpler times, the MAGA favored 1950s. Everyone but white men will again be told their place. And yes, I’m a white male.
What Tim said.
https://time.com/6225372/edward-blum-affirmative-action-supreme-court-interview/
Tim S.
Where in the world do you get that Asians will be harmed in the long run??
They were already being harmed by being discriminated against in the admissions process in the first place.
It doesn’t matter that white conservative (s) helped organize and fund this
case. It was a victory against discrimination and a victory for those discriminated against, Asian Americans.
**I’m sure the 24/7 race obsessed leftists groups were fully supporting the discriminatory admissions process also.**
Asian Americans had to score much higher than black and brown students..
I’ve read the stats a couple of times on how much higher Asians scored.
It was rediculiously higher and they were still being denied admissions.
Also, how do African Americans benefit from these admissions policies???
Typically when admitted with much lower test scores and standards, that usually translates into lower grades and much higher drop out rates.
Many black students admitted on a quota system ( or disguised as affirmative
action ) were over matched and did poorly.
**. How does that help anyone???**
Hopefully leftists want students to be successful in their educational endeavors.
However, it doesn’t sound like it.
Last, I could care less if you’re a white male.
Justice Thomas: Pulling up the ladder behind him since 1991.
Donald Trump: “vote for me. What do you have to lose?”
The question will be answered for decades in a manner that many didn’t think possible …