Affirmative Action Could Soon Be Overturned As Supreme Court Takes Up Harvard And UNC Cases

Topline

The U.S. Supreme Court will hear cases challenging Harvard University and the University of North Carolina (UNC)’s affirmative action policies that take race into account for admissions, the court announced Monday, which could potentially overturn the decades-old practice of affirmative action and threaten gains in diversity at colleges and universities nationwide.

The Harvard University campus on July 08, 2020 in Cambridge, Massachusetts.

Getty Images

Key Facts

The court announced it would take up the cases without comment, and it’s not clear yet whether the cases will be heard this term or after the Supreme Court’s next term begins in October.

The group Students for Fair Admissions (SFFA) sued Harvard University for allegedly discriminating against Asian-American applicants in its admissions process and unfairly favoring other applicants of color, accusing it of using a “racial hierarchy” in its admissions process.

The same group also sued UNC in order to cover both public and private universities—noting UNC is the oldest public college in the U.S.—and alleged the university’s policy violates the 14th Amendment’s equal protection clause by not guaranteeing racial neutrality.

Harvard and UNC have denied the accusations their affirmative action policies are discriminatory and argue they’re in line with previous court rulings upholding the practice, and UNC said it “considers race flexibly as merely one factor among numerous factors” in its admissions process.

Harvard said getting rid of race considerations in its admissions would result in “steep declines in diversity,” noting taking race out of the equation entirely would reduce enrollment of Black students at the school from 14% to 6% of its student body, and Hispanic enrollment from 14% to 9%.

Both the district and appeals court ruled in Harvard’s favor and upheld their admissions policy, and a district court ruled in UNC’s favor, but SFFA appealed the case to the Supreme Court before an appeals court could rule so that it could be heard with the Harvard case.

What To Watch For

The Supreme Court has repeatedly held up affirmative action in the past, but there are fears it will now be overturned given the court’s 6-3 conservative majority. Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito have already ruled against affirmative action in the past, as has Chief Justice John Roberts, who once wrote, “It is a sordid business, this divvying us up by race.”

Crucial Quote

“Harvard’s mistreatment of Asian-American applicants is appalling,” SFFA alleged in its Supreme Court complaint, calling the case “the kind of important individual rights dispute that this Court has not hesitated to hear.” “Review thus would be warranted if the defendant were any university subject to Title VI. But it isn’t just any university. It’s Harvard.”

Chief Critic

The Supreme Court’s past rulings on affirmative action “sent a powerful signal that diversity is vital to preparing individuals to work and participate as citizens in our pluralistic democracy,” Harvard wrote in its opposition to SFFA’s complaint. “Americans have come to view diversity as integral to learning and to trust that the path to leadership is open to all. Overruling those cases at this time would undermine the public’s faith in those foundational principles.”

Key Background

The concept of “affirmative action” to ensure racial diversity dates back to a 1965 executive order that told employers to “take affirmative action to ensure that equal opportunity is provided in all aspects of their employment.” The Supreme Court then officially sanctioned affirmative action in college admissions in a 1978 ruling that found universities could constitutionally consider race as part of its admissions process, though it struck down schools using quota systems dedicating a certain number of enrollment places to students of a particular race. Since then, the Supreme Court has repeatedly held up affirmative action policies in 2003 and 2016, though it struck down a “point system” at the University of Michigan that automatically gave applications from underrepresented racial minorities enough points to virtually guarantee admission. While critics of affirmative action policies contend they discriminate against white and Asian American students, proponents say the practice is necessary for ensuring diversity both at universities and the workforce at large. Harvard also alleged that not considering race in admissions would have “adverse effects on Harvard’s ability to create an environment that promotes cross-racial interactions and that lessens feelings of alienation and isolation.”

Tangent

The Trump Administration had strongly backed the case against Harvard, filing a brief in support of SFFA in 2018 when the case was at a lower court and filing separate affirmative action complaints against Yale University that the Biden Administration later dropped. William Cosovoy, the lead attorney for SFFA, has represented former President Donald Trump in private lawsuits concerning the release of his tax returns. The Biden administration, however, told the Supreme Court in December it should not take up the Harvard case, arguing the lower court rulings that upheld the school’s policy were decided correctly and the case is an “unsuitable vehicle” for the court to overturn its previous affirmative action rulings.