Notice
Continue reading the main story
In previous decisions, the court has supported consideration of race as one of many factors in promoting educational diversity.
931
VonAdam Liptak
Reporting from Washington
Supreme Court this ThursdayFunding declinedNOColleges and universities across the country, outlawing racially motivated admissions programs at Harvard and the University of North Carolina and drastically curtailing a policy that has long been a mainstay of higher education.
The vote was 6 to 3, with the Liberal members of the court dissenting.
“Harvard and U.N.C. "Admission programs cannot be reconciled with the guarantees of the Equal Treatment Clause," Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. wrote for the majority. "Both programs lack sufficiently focused and measurable goals to justify the use of race, inevitably use race negatively, incorporate racial stereotypes, and lack meaningful endpoints."
In summing up her dissent with the court, a rare move signaling deep dissent, Justice Sonia Sotomayor said affirmative action was vital to addressing persistent and systematic racial discrimination.
"The court undermines the constitutional guarantee of equal protection by further exacerbating racial inequality in education, the very foundation of our democratic government and pluralistic society," she said in her written dissent.
The decision effectively ensured that the student body on campuses at elite institutions would become whiter and more Asian and less black and Hispanic. It was also thought to create confusion as schools reevaluate their admissions practices and could complicate diversity efforts elsewhere, limiting the flow of highly qualified candidates from minority groups and making it harder for employers to consider race in hiring.
The decision showed the court's conservative supermajority moving at an accelerated pace to address some of the most sensitive and contentious issues in American society, including:abortion, weapons and now racing - all in one year. It also reflects the enormous impact that President Donald J. Trump to the court after appointing three justices and renewed doubts about whether the court's approach, which on Thursday overturned more than 40 years of precedent, would help the stability of the law. and the legitimacy of the court at stake.
pollsthey provide a complex picture of where people engage in positive action, and the numbers vary depending on the wording of the questions. But overall, racially motivated admissions programs are unpopular, suggesting Thursday's decision will not spark the backlash that followed last year's decision to gut constitutional abortion rights.
Democrats, including President Biden, called the decision a step backwards.
In a televised address a few hours after it aired, Mr. Biden saidurged the countryto ensure that the decision was not "the last word" on affirmative action.
"There is still discrimination in America," he said, repeating his words for emphasis. "Today's decision does not change that."
Biden paused when a reporter asked if the court was "dishonest." "It's not a normal courtroom," he replied.
Conservative leaders and advocacy groups welcomed the result, and some said it would make the admissions process fairer.
Matt Schlapp, president of the American Conservative Union, one of the country's largest conservative groups, said the decision, along with last year's abortion court ruling, was "a triumphant return to repairing our battered Constitution."
Justice Sotomayor dissented, writing that the majority had abandoned authority jurisprudence.
"Essentially," he wrote, "the six unelected members of today's majority are subverting the status quo based on their political preferences about how race in America should be, but isn't, and their preferences for a shade of colorblindness." in a society. .” where race has always mattered and still matters, both factually and legally.
The chief justice wrote that sometimes admissions officials can still consider race, even withinthe college essay. "Nothing in this Opinion should be construed to prohibit universities from considering an applicant's discussion of how race has affected his life, whether through discrimination, inspiration or otherwise," he wrote.
The bottom line, according to Justice Roberts, is that applicants must be assessed individually. "In other words," he wrote, "the student should be treated on the basis of his experiences as an individual—not on the basis of his race."
Justice Sotomayor said it was thin porridge.
"This supposed admission that universities may, in some cases, consider race in application essays is nothing more than an attempt to put lipstick on a pig," he wrote.
However, he acknowledged that most colleges and universities had few tools to accommodate students from diverse backgrounds, mostly focused on socioeconomic factors.
The chief justice wrote that educational diversity, the idea of students from different backgrounds learning from each other, is a laudable goal. But he added that such a goal meets the demanding judicial scrutiny necessary when race is a factor because it cannot be measured.
Bild
In contrast, Justice Sotomayor wrote that for decades the majority had practically rejected the logic that justified affirmative action.
"Without a new reasoning of fact or law," he wrote, "the court calls into question its longstanding position that diversity in higher education is of compelling value." To avoid public accountability for its decision, the court pursues a unique quantifiable requirement of its own making.
Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel A. Alito Jr., Neil M. Gorsuch, Brett M. Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett concurred in the chief justice's majority opinion. Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson echoed Justice Sotomayor's dissent.
In all, six judges issued opinions spanning more than 200 pages, which were characterized by sometimes harsh language and wildly different accounts of the country's history and the role of race in today's society.
For example, the two sides have conflicting views on the meaning of Brown v. The powerful 1954 Board of Education decision outlawed segregation in public schools. The lesson of Brown, Justice Roberts wrote, was that "the time to discriminate on the basis of race is over."
Justice Sotomayor said the ruling represented a different principle, accusing the majority of complicity in revisionist history. "Brown was," he wrote, "a racially conscious decision that emphasized the importance of education in our society."
He added: "Even at the risk of stating the obvious, and as Brown recognized, the 14th Amendment was intended to reverse the effects of a world where laws systematically subjugated blacks and created a racist caste system." Brown and his descendants recognized the need to take race-affirming and conscious steps to eradicate this system.”
Black Justices Thomas and Jackson exchanged particularly harsh remarks.
"In their view," Justice Thomas wrote of Justice Jackson, "we are all irresistibly trapped in a fundamentally racist society in which the original sin of slavery and the historical oppression of black Americans continue to define our lives today."
Justice Jackson responded that her colleague's "prolonged attack in response to a dissent I did not write to attack an admissions program that is not the only one UNC offers," adding that "Judge Thomas' opinion also shows an obsession with the race consciousness that it goes far beyond my or UNC's holistic understanding that race can be a factor that affects the unique life experiences of applicants."
He said he won't press all of his points because "Judge Thomas is burning too many other scarecrows to list here or to erase them entirely." (Judge Jackson declined to intervene in the Harvard case because he was a member of the University's board.)
Bild
Chief Justice Roberts, in a footnote, defined the ruling's scope in one respect, saying the court was not deciding whether military academies can consider race in their admissions decisions because they have "potentially different interests."
The heated arguments were also evident in court, where three judges spoke from the bench. Between the announcement of his majority opinion by Chief Justice Roberts and the oral dissent by Justice Sotomayor, Justice Thomas summed up his concurring opinion in his rising baritone.
He said he was forced to address "racial discrimination against Asian-American students," adding that "this discrimination is clearly and unequivocally unconstitutional."
Then Justice Sotomayor, who sat just to the right of Justice Thomas, dissented for nearly 20 minutes. "In a society where opportunity is divided along racial lines, equality cannot be achieved through racial blindness," he said.
The two cases decided Thursday were not identical. As a public university, U.N.C. bound by both the equality clause of the constitution and theTitle VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits racial discrimination by institutions receiving federal funds. Harvard is a private institution and is governed by a single law.
In the North Carolina case, the plaintiffs alleged that the university discriminated against white and Asian applicants by giving preference to black, Hispanic and Native American applicants. The university responded that its admissions policies encouraged educational diversity and were legal under longstanding Supreme Court precedent.
The case against Harvard has an additional element, namely the claim by the universityDiscrimination against Asian American studentsUsing a subjective standard to assess traits such as friendliness, courage, and friendliness, effectively limiting their acceptance.
Harvard lawyers said the challengers relied on flawed statistical analysis and denied the university discriminated against Asian-American applicants. In general, they said racially motivated admissions policies are legal.
Bild
Both cases - Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, no. 20-1199, and Students for Fair Admissions v. University of North Carolina, #21-707 - Submitted by Students for Fair Admissions, a group founded byEdward Bloom, rights activist who organized numerous lawsuits against racist licensing guidelines and voting rights laws, many of which reached the Supreme Court.
The two universities won in federal court, and Harvard's decision was upheld by a federal appeals court.
The main precedent wasGrutter v. Bollinger, a 2003 decision in which the Supreme Court upheld holistic admissions programs, stating that it is permissible to consider race to achieve educational diversity. Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, writing for the majority in the case, said she hoped that "25 years from now" or by 2028 "the use of racial preferences will no longer be necessary."
Chief Justice Roberts wrote Thursday: "There is no reason to believe that defendants—even if acting in good faith—will enforce the Equal Treatment Clause anytime soon."
In his concurring opinion, Justice Thomas wrote that the majority opinion "makes it clear that Grutter is rejected on all counts."
For her part, Justice Sotomayor issued a defiant note.
"The pursuit of racial diversity will continue," he wrote. “While the Court has eliminated nearly all uses of race in college admissions, universities can and should continue to use all available tools to meet society's need for diversity in education. Despite the court's unwarranted exercise of power, today's statement will only serve to demonstrate the court's own impotence in the face of an America whose calls for equality are growing."
Zach Montague contributed coverage.
Adam Liptak covers the Supreme Court and writesbarra lateral,column on legal developments. A graduate of Yale Law School, he practiced law for 14 years before joining The Times in 2002. @Adamliptak • Facebook
A print version of this article appears at, Unity
ONE
, book page
1
from the New York edition
with the title:
Judges rule against affirmative action.reprint orders|Today's Newspaper|Sign up to
931
931
Notice
Continue reading the main story
FAQs
Supreme Court rejects affirmative action programs at Harvard and U.N.C. Away.? ›
Supreme Court justices ruled that the admissions policies at the University of North Carolina, one of the country's oldest public universities, and Harvard University, the country's oldest private university, violated the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment.
What two top universities banned affirmative action? ›Supreme Court justices ruled that the admissions policies at the University of North Carolina, one of the country's oldest public universities, and Harvard University, the country's oldest private university, violated the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment.
Has the Supreme Court upheld the use of affirmative action in higher education? ›June 29 (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday struck down race-conscious policies in college admissions, ending decades of precedent that had allowed schools nationwide to use such programs to increase the diversity of their student bodies.
What did the Supreme Court ban in a 2003 affirmative action lawsuit against the University of Michigan? ›In the earlier court fight, the University of Michigan in June 2003 won a lawsuit over its law school's race-conscious admissions policies. But Michigan voters three years later adopted Proposal 2, banning the state's public institutions from giving preferential treatment based on race.
Which Supreme Court case dealt with affirmative action policy in college admission? ›Bollinger, a 2003 case affirming that considering race in a holistic admissions process to promote campus diversity did not harm non-minority applicants nor violated federal law. The 2003 precedent followed a 1978 decision in Regents of the University of California v. Bakke.
Which schools do not use affirmative action? ›Follow our live coverage of the Supreme Court hearings on affirmative action. It has been more than 15 years since two of the country's top public university systems, the University of Michigan and the University of California, were forced to stop using affirmative action in admissions.
Does MIT have affirmative action? ›MIT, as a federal contractor, must produce and carry out an Affirmative Action plan annually. In order to focus efforts where they are needed, MIT analyzes employment data for groups of related jobs in each MIT School and area.
Does Harvard use affirmative action? ›The Supreme Court held that both Harvard and UNC's affirmative-action programs violated the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause.
What is the new affirmative action ruling? ›The Supreme Court's landmark decision on Thursday to gut affirmative action has made it unlawful for colleges to take race into consideration as a specific factor in admissions.
Has the Supreme Court struck down affirmative action? ›The Supreme Court on Thursday struck down affirmative action in college admissions, declaring race cannot be a factor and forcing institutions of higher education to look for new ways to achieve diverse student bodies.
Where is affirmative action banned? ›
Since then, eight other states – Arizona, Florida, Idaho, Michigan, Nebraska, New Hampshire, Oklahoma and Washington – have also barred race-based considerations, often through ballot initiatives approved by the states' voters.
What ruling did the Supreme Court make about the use of affirmative action in University admissions in Grutter v Bollinger? ›Bollinger, a case decided by the United States Supreme Court on June 23, 2003, upheld the affirmative action admissions policy of the University of Michigan Law School. The decision permitted the use of racial preference in student admissions to promote student diversity.
What was the first major Supreme Court case to challenge affirmative action? ›On June 26, 1978, the Supreme Court handed down the first major affirmative action decision concerning university admissions, involving a 38-year-old white engineer Allan Bakke's petition to enter a California medical school.
What are the two Supreme Court cases for affirmative action? ›The two cases the court ruled on Thursday are Students for Fair Admission v. Harvard and Students for Fair Admission v. University of North Carolina.
What was the unanimous decision of the Supreme Court in 2023? ›DECISION: 6/29/2023: In a unanimous opinion, Justice Samuel Alito wrote that "Title VII requires an employer that denies a religious accommodation to show that the burden of granting an accommodation would result in substantial increased costs in relation to the conduct of its particular business."
When did the Supreme Court overturn affirmative action? ›On June 29, 2023, the Supreme Court of the United States issued its decision addressing two cases that challenged affirmative action in higher education, Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President & Fellows of Harvard College and Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. University of North Carolina.
What 9 states banned affirmative action? ›Nine states in the United States have banned race-based affirmative action: California (1996), Washington (1998, rescinded 2022), Florida (1999), Michigan (2006), Nebraska (2008), Arizona (2010), New Hampshire (2012), Oklahoma (2012), and Idaho (2020).
What factors led the Supreme Court to weaken affirmative action laws? ›What factors led the Supreme Court to weaken affirmative action laws? -The Court ruled that particular affirmative action policies violate the Fourteenth Amendment. -The Court decided that affirmative action policies must survive strict scrutiny.
Does UCLA use affirmative action? ›The UCLA policy on equal employment opportunity and affirmative action is communicated to the campus and the public through various institutional publications.
Does Yale practice affirmative action? ›Yale has faced its own lawsuits when it comes to challenges against its use of affirmative action. The Department of Justice under the Trump administration sued the school for such practices but dropped that lawsuit in 2021. And Students for Fair Admissions had filed a similar lawsuit against the New Haven university.
Is MIT LGBT friendly? ›
Commitment to LGBTQ Issues
LBGTQ+ Services supports numerous student, employee, and alumnx groups as well as other departments and initiatives on campus aiming to foster equity, intersectionality, and the continuum of social justice.
Princeton has considered race in admissions since 1963. The University has repeatedly affirmed its commitment to affirmative action in light of the many challenges it has faced since then, including after California and Michigan outlawed affirmative action in 1996 and 2006, respectively.
What was the outcome of the Harvard affirmative action case? ›The Supreme Court ruled Thursday that affirmative action policies at Harvard and the University of North Carolina that consider a student's race for college admissions are unconstitutional.
Does Boston University use affirmative action? ›We provide certification that Boston University complies with equal opportunity and affirmative action laws and regulations, with supporting information as needed, to offices and departments who are required to provide it to state, federal, or other agencies or entities.
Does Boston College use affirmative action? ›Boston College is committed to the policies, principles, and practices of equal opportunity, affirmative action, and nondiscrimination in all of its activities, including, but not limited to employment.
How many colleges use affirmative action? ›| [hide]Historical consideration of race at public four-year universities in the United States | ||
|---|---|---|
| State | State ban | Public 4-year colleges |
| Arkansas | No | 11 |
| California | Yes | 32 |
| Colorado | No | 13 |
Associate Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas and the court's other four conservatives joined Chief Justice John Roberts' opinion striking down affirmative action.
What are the three types of affirmative action plans? ›Affirmative actions include training programs, outreach efforts, and other positive steps. These procedures should be incorporated into the company's written personnel policies.
What does affirmative action mean for colleges? ›What Is Affirmative Action? In a higher education context, affirmative action – which stemmed from the civil rights movement in the 1960s – is the practice of considering student background characteristics such as race as a factor in deciding whether to admit an applicant.
What is affirmative action program? ›Affirmative Action is a program of positive action, undertaken with conviction and effort to overcome the present effects of past practices, policies, or barriers to equal employment opportunity and to achieve the full and fair participation of women, minorities and individuals with disabilities found to be ...
How did the Supreme Court vote on affirmative action? ›
The Supreme Court's decision on Thursday to strike down affirmative action at colleges and universities sent shock waves throughout higher education. But the effects of the 6-3 ruling, which found that race-conscious admissions programs were unlawful, promise to go much wider.
How many states have no affirmative action? ›In fact, 9 states have bans against race-based college admission policies: Idaho, Arizona, Florida, Nebraska, New Hampshire, Oklahoma, Washington, California, and Michigan. Two of the largest colleges in the country filed briefs expressing support of affirmative action in this landmark case.
What percentage of affirmative action students graduate? ›| School Type | Average African American/Black Student Graduation Rate | Average Black-to-White Student Graduation Gap |
|---|---|---|
| Top 12 Public Universities With Affirmative Action | 87.3% | 6% |
| Top 12 Public Universities Without Affirmative Action | 78% | 10.1% |
Federal law has long permitted the use of affirmative action in a variety of contexts. In the realm of higher education, colleges and universities may, under limited circumstances, use race-conscious measures to promote diversity on campus.
What did the Supreme Court rule in the Bakke decision? ›Recent News. Bakke decision, formally Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, ruling in which, on June 28, 1978, the U.S. Supreme Court declared affirmative action constitutional but invalidated the use of racial quotas.
What has the Supreme Court ruled with regard to affirmative action quizlet? ›The Supreme Court has limited the application of affirmative action. In general, the Supreme Court has allowed practices seeking to redress instances of discrimination unless those practices infringe on the rights of individuals or unless they involve the strict use of quotas.
Has affirmative action changed in college admissions in response to statewide bans and judicial rulings? ›We find substantial declines in levels of affirmative action practiced by highly selective colleges in the states affected by bans and the Hopwood and Johnson rulings, and no evidence of declines outside these states (and thus modest and generally insignificant declines nationwide).
What did Bakke argue was the reason he was rejected from med school? ›Facts of the case
Bakke's qualifications (college GPA and test scores) exceeded those of any of the minority students admitted in the two years Bakke's applications were rejected. Bakke contended, first in the California courts, then in the Supreme Court, that he was excluded from admission solely on the basis of race.
On January 21, 2010, the court issued a 5–4 decision in favor of Citizens United that struck down BCRA's restrictions on independent expenditures from corporate treasuries as violations of the First Amendment.
What was the first Supreme Court case to declare a law unconstitutional? ›Madison (1803) Citation: Show-cause order served on James Madison, Secretary of State, 1802; Records of the Supreme Court of the United States; Record Group 267; National Archives.
When did affirmative action start in college admissions? ›
Affirmative action policy has shaped U.S. higher education as we know it. In the late 1960s, admissions departments around the country began considering race as a factor when admitting new students. These policies aimed to accept more students of color who had historically been excluded from colleges and universities.
Why are the Supreme Court's decisions about affirmative action changing over time? ›The Supreme Courts' decisions about affirmative action change over time because they are made to fit undergoing needs of minorities. If there is no discrimination, there won't be a need for affirmative action.
How will affirmative action affect college admissions? ›How the End of Affirmative Action Could Affect the College Admissions Process. The Supreme Court ruled Thursday that college admissions can no longer specifically take race into account as a basis for admission, a decision that will now put limits on affirmative action programs across the country.
Is the Supreme Court the last decision? ›When the Supreme Court rules on a constitutional issue, that judgment is virtually final; its decisions can be altered only by the rarely used procedure of constitutional amendment or by a new ruling of the Court. However, when the Court interprets a statute, new legislative action can be taken.
Is the Supreme Court the final decision maker? ›What the Supreme Court Does. Under Article III of the United States Constitution, the Supreme Court exercises the ultimate judicial power of the United States.
Is the Supreme Court majority conservative? ›The current court's conservative majority is now often seen as a Federalist Society majority.
Does affirmative action affect private universities? ›The Supreme Court's ruling on affirmative action won't affect public colleges and universities in California, but it will affect private universities. This is because of Proposition 209 which passed in 1996 and went into effect in 1998.
Which states ended affirmative action? ›9 states already ban race-based affirmative action
Nine states already ban race-based affirmative action policies for public colleges: Arizona, California, Florida, Idaho, Michigan, Nebraska, New Hampshire, Oklahoma and Washington.
On March 6, 1961 President John F. Kennedy issued Executive Order 10925, which included a provision that government contractors "take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed, and employees are treated during employment, without regard to their race, creed, color, or national origin."
Does UCLA have affirmative action? ›General. Consistent with current federal regulations, including Executive Order 11246, state regulations and University policy requirements, the University maintains and implements an Affirmative Action Program.
What are 2 reasons some colleges have adopted some form of affirmative action program? ›
- Students of color remain underrepresented on college campuses. ...
- Prioritizing diversity benefits students of all races. ...
- Affirmative action in education promotes diversity in ways a focus on income alone cannot.
Title IX is a federal law that was passed in 1972 to ensure that male and female students and employees in educational settings are treated equally and fairly. It protects against discrimination based on sex (including sexual harassment).
Does Notre Dame use affirmative action? ›Each year the University of Notre Dame develops three Affirmative Action Plans (AAPs) for staff and faculty, regarding minorities and women, individuals with disabilities, and veterans.
Does Columbia University use affirmative action? ›Columbia University is an equal opportunity/affirmative action -- Disability/Veterans employer.
What are the disadvantages of affirmative action? ›Perhaps the most tragic side effect of affirmative action is that very significant achievements of minority students can become compromised. It is often not possible to tell whether a given student genuinely deserved admission to Stanford, or whether he is there by virtue of fitting into some sort of diversity matrix.
What are the disadvantages of affirmative action in education? ›Some argue that affirmative action may disadvantage white employees. It may not be fair for white people to gain from programs that are supposed to benefit racial minorities. Some have also argued that affirmative action discriminates against white people who are not part of the targeted group.
Is affirmative action legal in California? ›The reason is straightforward: California law has banned affirmative action since 1996 when it passed Proposition 209. So for schools like Berkeley, the court's ruling does not represent much of a change.
Can universities discriminate against religion? ›The Civil Rights Division's Educational Opportunities Section enforces Title IV of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination based on religion in public primary and secondary schools, as well as public colleges and universities.
Are men protected by Title IX? ›Myth: Title IX applies only to discrimination against women. While Title IX has been used mostly by women seeking to protect their rights, Title IX also serves to protect the rights of men. Title IX requires that males and females receive fair and equal treatment in all areas of education.
What are some examples of gender discrimination in education? ›For example, comments that girls are not as good at math as boys. Being called derogatory names related to your sexual orientation. Being misgendered by classmates or teachers. Being told by a teacher that they expect more (or less) of you because you are a girl, boy, or nonbinary person.
Is affirmative action in college admissions legal? ›
The Supreme Court on Thursday struck down affirmative action in college admissions, declaring race cannot be a factor and forcing institutions of higher education to look for new ways to achieve diverse student bodies.
Are private universities bound by the First Amendment? ›Because private universities are not government entities, they are not required to uphold First Amendment protections in the same manner as public universities. In other words, private institutions may impose stricter limitations on free speech. Still, most adhere to free speech principles and support academic freedom.