The Supreme Court of the United States has ruled that race cannot be a factor in university admissions.
The precedent-setting decision overturns decades-old US policies regarding so-called affirmative action, also known as positive discrimination.
It is one of the most controversial topics in American education.
In the 1960s, affirmative action became a policy that has been defended as a means to increase diversity.
US President Joe Biden stated that he “strongly” disagreed with the court’s decision and that the United States would require “a new path forward that is consistent with the law”.
“We cannot let this decision be the last word,” he stated. “Discrimination still exists in America”
The cases involved admissions to Harvard and North Carolina State University (UNC). The conservative majority of the court ruled 6-3 against North Carolina and 6-2 against Harvard.
The justices sided with Students for Fair Admissions, an organization founded by the conservative activist Edward Blum.
Last October, the group argued in court that Harvard’s race-conscious admissions policy violated Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which prohibits discrimination based on race, color, or national origin.
Chief Justice John Roberts wrote: “Many universities have erroneously concluded for far too long that the defining characteristic of an individual is not overcoming obstacles, developing skills, or learning lessons, but rather the color of their skin.”
His majority opinion was that the policies of UNC and Harvard were “well intentioned.”
However, he wrote, “Harvard’s admissions process is based on the harmful stereotype that a black student can typically offer something that a white person cannot.”
Justice Clarence Thomas, the second black justice in the United States and a conservative who has long advocated for the abolition of affirmative action, wrote that such programs were “patently unconstitutional.”
“The self-proclaimed righteousness of universities does not grant them permission to discriminate on the basis of race,” he said.
The Supreme Court noted that the opinion does not prohibit universities from considering an applicant’s “discussion of how race affects his or her life”
Sonia Sotomayor, one of the liberal justices who dissented, wrote that the decision “rolls back decades of precedent and monumental progress.”
She stated that the decision “cements a superficial rule of colorblindness as a constitutional principle in an endemically segregated society”
Another dissenting liberal justice, the black Ketanji Brown Jackson, stated that the decision is “truly a tragedy for us all”
She stated, “With a let-them-eat-cake ignorance, the majority today pulls the ripcord and announces ‘colorblindness for all’ by legal fiat.”
However, Justice Roberts wrote that the dissenting justices had disregarded portions of the law that they disapproved of.
“Most troubling of all is what the dissent must defend with these omissions: a judiciary that chooses winners and losers based on the color of their skin,” he said.
UNC Chancellor Kevin Guskiewicz stated in a statement that the university will review the decision and “take any steps necessary to comply with the law” despite the unfavorable outcome.
Lawrence Bacow, the president of Harvard, stated, “We will certainly comply with the court’s decision.” He added that the Ivy League institution remained dedicated to being “a community comprised of individuals with diverse backgrounds, perspectives, and life experiences.”
Mr. Blum, the founder of Students for Fair Admission, lauded his organization’s victory in the landmark ruling.
He referred to it as “the beginning of the restoration of the colorblind legal covenant that binds our multiracial and multiethnic nation together.”
“These discriminatory admission practices undermined the integrity of our country’s civil rights laws,” he explained.
Former US President Donald Trump, the current Republican frontrunner for the 2020 election, lauded the decision as a “great day”
He stated on social media that Americans with “extraordinary talent and everything else necessary for success” are “finally being rewarded.”
The Supreme Court has twice upheld university affirmative action programs, most recently in 2016.
Arizona, California, Florida, Georgia, Oklahoma, New Hampshire, Michigan, Nebraska, and Washington have already enacted bans on race-based college admissions policies.
After 24 years of prohibition, California voters rejected a 2020 ballot measure to reinstate affirmative action.
The conservative-leaning Supreme Court’s vote to overturn Roe v. Wade, a 1973 ruling that granted women the right to abortion, infuriated many US liberals last year.
Several more recent decisions, however, have been applauded by liberals, including one regarding the welfare of Native American children and three others regarding election laws in Alabama, Louisiana, and North Carolina.
