The United States Supreme Court struck down race-conscious admissions procedures at Harvard University and the University of North Carolina on Thursday, effectively outlawing affirmative action measures that have long been used to increase the number of Black, Hispanic, and other underrepresented minority students on college campuses.
The justices ruled in a landmark decision that will force many American colleges to rethink their admissions policies that affirmative action admissions programs that consider an applicant’s race in ways like Harvard and UNC do violate the promise of equal protection under the law in the United States.
“Student must be treated based on his or her experiences as an individual not on the basis of race”
The justices ruled in favor of a group called Students for Fair Admissions, founded by anti-affirmative action activist Edward Blum, in its appeal of lower court rulings upholding programs used at the two prestigious schools to foster a diverse student population, with the conservative justices dissenting. The votes were 6-3 in favor of UNC and 6-2 in favor of Harvard.
In a series of landmark verdicts last year, the Supreme Court overturned the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion statewide and expanded gun rights, both of which were spearheaded by conservative justices.
Chief Justice John Roberts, who authored Thursday’s ruling, said that a student “must be treated based on his or her experiences as an individual not on the basis of race. Many universities have for too long done just the opposite. And in doing so, they have concluded, wrongly, that the touchstone of an individual’s identity is not challenged bested, skills built, or lessons learned but the color of their skin. Our constitutional history does not tolerate that choice.”
According to Harvard, over 40% of colleges and institutions in the United States consider race in some way.
“Harvard and UNC admissions programs cannot be reconciled with the guarantees of the Equal Protection Clause,” Roberts wrote, referring to the constitutional provision.
Universities may still evaluate student writings in personal essays about “how race affected his or her life
According to Roberts, universities may still evaluate student writings in personal essays about “how race affected his or her life, whether through discrimination, inspiration, or otherwise.” However, according to Roberts, “Universities may not simply establish through application essays or other means the regime we hold unlawful today.”
Affirmative action has weathered Supreme Court review for decades, most recently in a 2016 ruling involving a white student who sued the University of Texas after being denied admission, backed by Blum.
Since 2016, the Supreme Court has swung to the right, with three justices who dissented in the University of Texas decision joining three new nominees by Republican former President Donald Trump, who is standing for re-election in 2024. On Thursday, Trump welcomed the decision as “a great day for America.”
Many higher education institutions, industries, and military officials have long supported affirmative action on college campuses, not just to address racial inequity and exclusion in American life, but also to assure a diverse talent pool in the workplace and the United States armed services.
The ruling on Thursday appeared to spare military service academies from its reach, with Roberts mentioning “the potentially distinct interests that military academies may present,” and noting that the litigation had not addressed “the propriety of race-based admissions systems in that context.”
President Joe Biden’s administration has in recent weeks been discussing possible executive actions he could take in response to the court’s decision on affirmative action, a source familiar with the matter said after the ruling.
For decades, critics have argued that these rules are discriminatory
According to a person familiar with the topic, President Joe Biden’s administration has been contemplating alternative executive steps he could take in reaction to the court’s decision on affirmative action in recent weeks.
Harvard and UNC have stated that race is only one factor in a variety of individualized evaluations for admission without quotas, as permitted by previous Supreme Court precedents, and that restricting its consideration would result in a significant drop in enrollment of students from underrepresented groups.
For decades, critics have argued that these rules are discriminatory in and of themselves.
In a statement, Harvard officials said they would “determine how to preserve, consistent with the court’s new precedent, our essential values.”
President of the University of North Carolina System Peter Hans promised to “follow the law.”
“Our public universities do extraordinary work every day to serve students of all backgrounds, beliefs, income levels, and life experiences,” Hans added.
