By Mark Sherman

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.

The court's conservative majority overturned admissions plans at Harvard 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, the two justices who have acknowledged affirmative action played a role in their admissions to college and law school, 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.”

Jackson, who sat out the Harvard case because she had been a member of an advisory governing board, wrote, “With let-them-eat-cake obliviousness, today, the majority pulls the ripcord and announces ‘colorblindness for all’ by legal fiat. But deeming race irrelevant in law does not make it so in life.”

The vote was 6-3 in the North Carolina case and 6-2 in the Harvard case. Justice Elena Kagan was the other dissenter.

President Joe Biden was expected to comment on the decision from the White House later Thursday.

Two former presidents offered starkly different takes on the high-court ruling.

Former President Donald Trump, the current GOP presidential frontrunner, wrote on his social media network that the decision marked “a great day for America. People with extraordinary ability and everything else necessary for success, including future greatness for our Country, are finally being rewarded.”

Former President Barack Obama said in a statement that affirmative action “allowed generations of students like Michelle and me to prove we belonged. Now it’s up to all of us to give young people the opportunities they deserve — and help students everywhere benefit from new perspectives.”

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.

Roberts' opinion effectively did so, both Thomas and the dissenters wrote.

The only institutions of higher education explicitly left out of the ruling are the nation's military academies, Roberts wrote, suggesting that national security interests could affect the legal analysis.

Blum’s group had 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.

Updated with additional details.

Share:
More In Politics
Impact on Consumers as More Companies Leave Russian Market
Following the invasion of Ukraine, a multitude of Western companies have paused doing business with Russia. PepsiCo, Coca-Cola, McDonald's, and Starbucks are the most recent companies to temporarily cease operations in Russia. Dean of Miami Herbert Business School at the University of Miami, John Quelch, joined Cheddar News to discuss what message this sends to Russia and the Russian consumer. “I would not underestimate the collective strength of all of these multinational companies, essentially coming together to make their collective statement in support of the political statements that have come out of Washington," he said.
Russia-Ukraine Crisis Putting Crypto In The Spotlight
The war in Ukraine continues to reveal heartbreaking gut-wrenching stories. The war in itself is not only devastating but also expensive. Experts estimate that Russia is draining nearly $20 million dollars each day to continue occupying and invading Ukraine. All this could force the country to turn to cryptocurrencies. It's a major turn for the country that briefly considered outlined digital assets entirely, but it could also have serious implications for cryptos. Managing Director at Quantum Fintech Group, Harry Yeh, joined Cheddar to discuss more.
Why U.S. Oil Production Won't Ramp Up Overnight
President Biden announced a ban on Russian oil and natural gas imports to the U.S. in response to its invasion of Ukraine, a move he warned could lead to an even greater surge in gas prices. The ban is prompting a conversation about the current oil production levels in the U.S. and whether or not the industry can ramp up production to soften the blow to American families at the gas pump. Clark Williams-Derry, Energy Finance Analyst with the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis, breaks down the state of the U.S. oil industry and how the ban might impact production levels here at home.
What Biden's Ban on Russian Oil Imports Could Mean for Growing Energy Costs
As Russia intensifies its war on Ukraine, President Biden announced a ban on oil imported from the aggressor nation. Critics of Russia have said this would be the best way to force Putin to pull back, but curbs on Russian oil exports are expected to send already skyrocketing oil and gas prices even higher, further impacting consumers, businesses, financial markets, and the global economy. Leslie Beyer, CEO of the Energy Workforce and Technology Council, joined Cheddar News' Closing Bell to discuss. "It's certainly going to increase pricing, but it is the right thing to do," she said. "The industry itself has already pulled out of the significant portion of its operations in Russia."
Problem Gambling Concerns With Sports Betting On The Rise
Sports Betting in the U.S. is booming. According to industry experts, we could see another boom this year as more states move towards statewide legalization of sports wagering. While this comes as huge news for fans, there are some very real concerns as to whether or not sports betting potentially poses a threat to public health. Senior Clinician at the Caron Treatment Centers, Eric Webber, joined Cheddar to discuss more.
White House Gender Policy Council Marks One-Year Anniversary
The Biden administration has made gender policy a core part of how it governs. The president established the first Gender Policy Council. It's on the same level as the National Security Council, Domestic Policy Council and National Economic Council, putting the interests of women and other underserved groups at the table for the most important policy discussions. Cheddar News sat down with Jennifer Klein, executive director and co-chair of the White House Gender Policy Council, to discuss the council's work and its significance during Women's History Month.
U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Advocates For Climate-Smart Practices
The United States Secretary of Agriculture, Tom Vilsack joins None of the Above to discuss the newly emerging conflict in Europe, what it means for agriculture in the states, dairy and meat consumption, and how the department is planning to promote climate-smart agriculture.
Load More