The Supreme Court effectively ended affirmative action programs in private and public higher education institutions on June 29.
This decision makes considering race in part of the college admissions process unconstitutional because they “did not use measurable objectives, used race to disadvantage some students, relied on stereotyping, and lacked ‘meaningful endpoints’,” according to a legal sidebar from the Congressional Research Service.
“I definitely believe it is a step backwards,” Khala Granville, Morgan State University director of undergraduate admissions and recruitment, said. “Because ultimately, the case can be summarized as the federal government no longer has a compelling interest in providing access to higher education for BIPOC students, which historically have not been made available to students from these particular backgrounds.”
The term BIPOC, which stands for Black, Indigenous, people of color, acknowledges the severity of injustices that Black and Indigenous people have and continue to experience. In the world of education, affirmative action programs minimized the barrier between students of color and access to higher education, furthering diversity and inclusion on college campuses. However, with affirmative action out of the picture, BIPOC representation may be difficult to achieve.
While the end of affirmative action may seem discouraging to BIPOC applicants, Granville believes students will likely continue to apply to predominantly white institutions.
“Highly qualified BIPOC students are still going to apply to schools on their list, regardless of the Supreme Court’s decision,” said Granville. “HBCUs are just as selective as Ivy League schools or larger flagship institutions. [HBCUs] should not be a default.”
Morgan State University President David Wilson ensures the Supreme Courts’ decision will not hinder the diversity of Morgan’s student body.
“Although today’s United States Supreme Court decision may be viewed as a setback for diversity for many higher education institutions nationwide and an unfortunate barrier to higher education for scores of deserving students, Morgan State University will continue to serve a multiethnic and multiracial student body,” Wilson said. “This has always been the case at Morgan and will continue to be the case, ensuring that our doors to higher education are opened as wide as possible to as many as possible.”
With the overturning of affirmative action, it has been said that HBCUs are likely to see a surge in enrollment as students of color flock to racially ambiguous universities that are more likely to accept their applications.
The Students For Fair Admissions, a conservative non-profit legal activist group that fought against affirmative action, filed a lawsuit against Harvard University and the University of North Carolina (UNC) nearly a decade ago. They argued that race-based admissions programs violate both Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
“In other words, the student must be treated based on his or her experiences as an individual—not on the basis of race,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote. “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.”
The High Court sided with the conservative activists in a 6-2 vote against Harvard and a 6-3 vote against UNC.
“The universities’ main response to these criticisms is ‘trust us,’” Roberts wrote. “They assert that universities are owed deference when using race to benefit some applicants but not others. While this Court has recognized a “tradition of giving a degree of deference to a university’s academic decisions,” it has made clear that deference must exist “within constitutionally prescribed limits.”
Several sitting justices such as Roberts, Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Amy Barrett, Brett Kavanaugh and Neil Gorsuch believe that college admissions should not be a racially biased process, but colorblind instead.
In the opinion delivered by the court, Roberts spoke for it saying, “it sees the universities’ admissions policies for what they are: rudderless, race-based preferences designed to ensure a particular racial mix in their entering classes. Those policies fly in the face of our colorblind Constitution and our Nation’s equality ideal. In short, they are plainly — and boldly — unconstitutional.”
The SCOTUS’s decision also raised serious questions about diversity on university campuses. It leaves the question of whether this was a positive stride forward or a reversal of several decades’ worth of progress.
Moving forward, college admissions offices will need to develop racially-unbiased admission methods. Time will tell if they continue to be racially inclusive without a country with affirmative action.
