In a landmark decision that reverberated across the nation, the Supreme Court handed down a historic ruling on June 29, striking down the use of race-based affirmative action in higher education admissions. The court’s opinions centered around two closely watched cases involving Harvard University and the University of North Carolina, both of which were brought by the group Students for Fair Admissions, led by conservative activist Ed Blum. These cases challenged the consideration of race as a factor in the holistic admissions process, alleging discrimination against White and Asian-American students. The 6-3 ruling, with Chief Justice John Roberts writing for the conservative majority, declared that race-based admissions violated the Equal Protections Clause of the 14th Amendment.

In a 2023 Pew survey, 53 percent of Asian Americans who had heard of affirmative action said they believe it’s a good thing, though 76 percent of Asian Americans overall said they did not think colleges should consider race or ethnicity as a factor in admissions decisions. A similar dynamic was evident across racial groups, with more of Black and Hispanic Americans saying affirmative action was a good thing rather than bad, but majorities of all racial groups also saying colleges shouldn’t consider race and ethnicity in admissions.

The Court’s Decision

The court’s decision marks a significant departure from the previous rulings and sets a new precedent in the long-standing debate over affirmative action. The practice, which has been in place since 1978 and had previously survived three high court challenges, has been seen as a means to address historical disadvantages and promote diversity on college campuses. However, the ruling now prohibits universities from considering an applicant’s race as a factor in the admissions process.

The Supreme Court’s decision emphasizes the importance of equal protection under the law and places a greater emphasis on merit-based evaluations. Chief Justice Roberts, in his opinion, argued that race-neutral alternatives should be explored to achieve diversity in higher education, while stressing that the court’s decision does not undermine the pursuit of inclusive campuses.

Roberts wrote 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 challenges bested, skills built or lessons learned but the color of their skin. Our constitutional history does not tolerate that choice.”

The dissenting opinions, penned by Justices Sonia Sotomayor, the first Latina Supreme Court Justice, argued that affirmative action is necessary to address systemic inequalities and ensure representation for historically marginalized groups.

“Today, this court stands in the way and rolls back decades of precedent and momentous progress,” Sotomayor wrote.

Sotomayor added that the “court cements a superficial rule of colorblindness as a constitutional principle in an endemically segregated society where race has always mattered and continues to matter.”

While the court’s newest and first Black female justice, Ketanji Brown Jackson, recused herself from the case because she has served on Harvard’s Board of Overseers, that didn’t stop her from issuing a separate scathing dissenting opinion.

“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,” she said.

Reactions from Institutions

Following the court’s ruling, institutions across the country have expressed strong opinions regarding the future of admissions practices and the pursuit of diversity in higher education. While some institutions took the opportunity to communicate with their students and affirm their commitment to comply with the new legal requirements, others, including Goizueta Business School Dean Gareth James, expressed profound concern about the potential impact of this ruling, not only at Emory but also at colleges and universities nationwide. “Diversity is an essential element of the educational experience, Dean James said. “Racial diversity, like gender diversity, professional diversity, and other forms of diversity introduces unique perspectives into the classroom creating more lively discussions, challenging norms, and spurring innovation. Please know Goizueta remains committed to building an inclusive community that not only attracts diverse individuals, but ensures these leaders—whether students, faculty, staff, or alumni—stay and thrive.” Perhaps most notable were the reactions shared by the two schools at the heart of the ruling:

Harvard University:

Harvard University, the subject of one of the cases, expressed disappointment with the court’s decision. In a statement, the university reaffirmed its commitment to creating a diverse and inclusive campus and suggested that the ruling would have a significant impact on higher education institutions nationwide.

Leaders from across the University, including President Larry Bacow and President-elect Claudine Gay, emphasized “the fundamental principle that deep and transformative teaching, learning, and research depend upon a community comprising people of many backgrounds, perspectives, and lived experiences.”

Their statement continued, “That principle is as true and important today as it was yesterday. So too are the abiding values that have enabled us — and every great educational institution — to pursue the high calling of educating creative thinkers and bold leaders, of deepening human knowledge, and of promoting progress, justice, and human flourishing.”

University of North Carolina:

The University of North Carolina, which was at the center of the other case, acknowledged the court’s ruling but expressed concerns about its potential impact on efforts to foster diversity. The university highlighted the importance of considering multiple factors in the admissions process to ensure a holistic evaluation of candidates.

In response to the ruling, Chancellor Kevin Guskiewicz said in a statement, “Carolina remains firmly committed to bringing together talented students with different perspectives and life experiences and continues to make an affordable, high-quality education accessible to the people of North Carolina and beyond. While not the outcome we hoped for, we will carefully review the Supreme Court’s decision and take any steps necessary to comply with the law.”

Civil Rights Organizations Outraged

Civil rights organizations, such as the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, expressed deep concern over the ruling. They argued that affirmative action is essential for promoting equal opportunities and leveling the playing field for underrepresented communities, and they pledged to continue advocating for policies that address systemic inequities in education.

“We know that race still unquestionably matters in our society — particularly for Black people and others whose race has shaped their lived experiences in a country rooted in a history and current reality of racial injustice.
“Despite the Supreme Court’s opinion today, colleges and universities still have a moral imperative and the legal ability to ensure that their doors are open equally to all students, including Black, Latinx, Native American, Hawaiian, Pacific Islander, and Asian American applicants. Even under the terms of this unfortunate decision, all students continue to have the freedom and opportunity to have their full identities, including the impact of race on their lived experiences, considered when seeking admissions to institutions of higher education.”
Janai Nelson, President and Director-Counsel,
NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund

Co-founder and Executive Director of the African American Policy Forum Kimberlé Crenshaw released a statement urging Americans to meet this moment with urgency.

“[The] Supreme Court decisions on Affirmative Action in college admissions represent yet another blow to the civil rights infrastructure and the freedom to learn in this country. These decisions are a cornerstone of an effective, growing and coordinated campaign by right-wing extremists to undermine multiracial democracy,” she wrote.

“For years, Affirmative Action has been overlooked as a major civil rights issue by people who purport to be the liberal establishment while also continuing to be a key target for democracy’s opponents on the right.”

Conservative Groups Celebrate

Conservative groups, including those supporting Students for Fair Admissions, celebrated the court’s decision as a victory for equal treatment and merit-based admissions. They argued that race should not be a determining factor in college admissions and emphasized the need for a color-blind society.

“The opinion issued today by the United States Supreme Court marks the beginning of the restoration of the colorblind legal covenant that binds together our multi-racial, multi-ethnic nation,” SFFA president Edward Blum said at a press conference.

“The administrators of higher education must note the law will not tolerate direct proxies for racial classifications,” Blum added. “For those in leadership positions at public and private universities, you have an obligation to follow the letter and the spirit of the law.”

While Democratic lawmakers characterized the ruling as an obstacle to the pursuit of racial justice, numerous Republican presidential candidates and lawmakers praised the decision for its endorsement of “merit-based” admissions.

“For decades, the Court turned a blind eye as higher education prioritized illegal social engineering over merit,” Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said in a statement. “Today’s rulings make clear that colleges may not continue discriminating against bright and ambitious students based on the color of their skin.”

Speaker of the House Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., also applauded the end of affirmative action, tweeting “students will be able to compete based on equal standards and individual merit,” and that the decision “will make the college admissions process fairer and uphold equality under the law.”

Uncertain Path Forward

As institutions grapple with the implications of this decision, the path forward for fostering diversity on college campuses remains uncertain. The ruling sparks a renewed focus on race-neutral alternatives and calls for innovative approaches to achieve inclusive educational environments while ensuring fair and merit-based evaluations of candidates. President Joe Biden strongly criticized the Supreme Court’s ruling, saying the decision “walked away from decades of precedent.” But he urged schools not to stop considering racial adversity for applicants altogether.

“We cannot let this decision be the last word,” Biden said in a White House address. “The court can render a decision but it cannot change what America stands for.”

Only time will reveal the full impact of this historic ruling on the landscape of higher education in the United States. Join the MBAchic network to stay in the know as this story develops, and sign up for The Weekly Chic to receive the latest from MBAchic, advice, news, jobs and more each week.