top of page
Writer's pictureJoanne Jacobs

SCOTUS: Universities can admit on 'challenges bested,' but not on skin color

Racial preferences in college admissions are unconstitutional, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled, striking down affirmative action plans used by Harvard and the University of North Carolina. Nobody was surprised.


"Many universities have for too long wrongly concluded that the touchstone of an individual’s identity is not challenges bested, skills built, or lessons learned, but the color of their skin," Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. wrote the 6-3 majority opinion. "This Nation’s constitutional history does not tolerate that choice."

Because Harvard’s and UNC’s admissions programs lack sufficiently focused and measurable objectives warranting the use of race, unavoidably employ race in a negative manner, involve racial stereotyping, and lack meaningful end points, those admissions programs cannot be reconciled with the guarantees of the Equal Protection Clause.

The majority, concurring and dissenting opinions are here.


Roberts' majority opinion takes a "moderate, minimalist" approach, writes blogger Ann Althouse, a University of Wisconsin law professor emeritus, on her blog. He argues that the court is enforcing its earlier Grutter decision, which "permitted race-based admissions only within the confines of narrow restrictions."


Harvard protest in 2018. Photo: Brian Snyder/Reuters

Universities may consider "an applicant’s discussion of how race affected his or her life, be it through discrimination, inspiration, or otherwise," Roberts wrote. But he warned against using application essays or other means to evade the ruling.


Good luck with that. I suspect universities will continue to overvalue black and Hispanic students' personal challenges, and undervalue Asian-American students' challenges. Remember that Harvard consistently gave Asian-American applicants low "personal ratings" on traits such as “positive personality,” likability, courage, kindness and being “widely respected.”


Many universities have stopped requiring SAT or ACT scores in favor of subjective criteria.


Universities have been here before, writes Rupa Subramanya in The Free Press. In 1995, when the University of California faced the end of race-based admissions, a task force recommended focusing less on grades and test scores and more on "qualitative assessments of a person’s interests, lived experience, that would contribute to the diversity of students.” That became known as “holistic admissions” or “holistic review,” she writes. "It sounded more palatable than affirmative action, but really it was a way of achieving the same outcome without saying so explicitly."


Malcolm Carson served on the task force. The son of a Jewish mother and a black father, Carson earned straight A's at Howard and a top 1 percent LSAT score, yet thinks affirmative action probably helped him get into law school at Stanford and Berkeley. He was a supporter. Now he "isn't sure where he stands," Subramanya writes.


Always and still a liberal, Carson has "grown uncomfortable" with what he sees as a left-wing obsession with racial identity, he told her. “There’s something very offensive to most people about being judged, not by their own achievements, their work ethics, or their accomplishments, but just being judged based on something they had no control over.”


Americans have moved beyond affirmative action, writes John Halpin on Liberal Patriot. He cites a recent Economist/YouGov poll that finds 65 percent of Americans reject considering race in the college admissions process; only 25 percent said it should be considered among other factors and 10 percent are unsure.


"Pluralities of black Americans (47 percent), Democrats (48 percent), political liberals (46 percent), and Biden voters (46 percent) also oppose the consideration of racial background in college admissions," Halpin writes.

9 Comments


phillipmarlowe
Jul 02, 2023

Lucian Truscott IV pointed out that in a footnote, CJ Roberts wrote

“there are “potentially distinct interests that military academies may present” that necessitates exempting them from the decision.”

So the Naval Academy, West Point, and the Air Force academy can still use to race In admissions.


“Eliminating racial discrimination means eliminating all of it,” Roberts wrote.

Cant be a conservative without being dishonest.

Like
phillipmarlowe
Jul 03, 2023
Replying to

Again ,

“Eliminating racial discrimination means eliminating all of it,” Roberts wrote.

Like

Steve Sherman
Steve Sherman
Jun 30, 2023

Back when my daughter was in HS she tested and was admitted to a super competitive citywide exam school. She had her challenges but graduated and credits the school for helping her in college but is extremely critical of the school environment and lots of other things about it.


We had an acquaintance who also went to the school and the Mom was Mexican. The kids spoke English with no accent as well as Spanish. The husband was American and some sort of tech executive. The Mom was an architect and had an accent but spoke perfect English but she brought up race and how the world was against her and her kids constantly but she checked the box as…


Like
Guest
Jun 30, 2023
Replying to

This was addressed 20 years ago by the Washington Post. Any black or Hispanic who attended a college prep private school should have never been receiving affirmative action.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/opinions/2003/02/16/not-affirmative-sir/ca79a51d-2e31-4221-a80e-2342d5bde8e8/

Like

lady_lessa
Jun 29, 2023

Now a child of Scot Irish heritage, living and raised in Appalachia, has the same chance as a child of African heritage living and raised in the poor areas of a city. I am assuming similar parental income and similar drug addicted surroundings.

Like
Guest
Jun 30, 2023
Replying to

The chances are unequal due to lack of pre K-12 college and university prep academic opportunity for the rural student. The rural student also likely does not have the internet access to utilize the necessary tutoring or library resources that are not available locally. The rural family does not have the housing, internet, daycare, transportation and health care subsidies that urban families do.

Like

Guest
Jun 29, 2023

The whole diversity argument, going back to Bakke, gets a bit ridiculous when you look at who the black students are that go to Ivies, they tend to be from middle to upper middle class, not the struggling to get out romanticized ghetto student, we all like to imagaine. "Hey, I roomed with Malia Obama at Harvard and now I GET the black experience."

Like
Guest
Jun 30, 2023
Replying to

the top 10% rule at UT-Austin worked better for helping poor whites, urban blacks, and many Latinos compared to affirmative action. The problem with UNC-Chapel Hill is that even though it is the state Flagship University it is smaller than North Carolina State and the same size as UNC-Charlotte. For a percentage solution to work in North Carolina (and in Virginia) the percentages would have to be smaller.


One of the side effects of a top 10% rule is that it does not benefit families to pay for private school since it does not really improve the chances for being admitted to an instate university.

Like
bottom of page