Supreme Court Strikes Down Race-Based Admissions at Harvard and U.N.C.

It's a wonder that blatant racial discrimination survived there for so long, given the 14th Amendment. And the Left are mourning the loss of their power to discriminate. Ever since Karl Marx they have been obsessed with race. Marx was an antisemite even though he was himself a Jew!

I note in the NYT article below that Democrats were pressing for equal opportunity when in fact they were plainly advocating UNequal opportunity. The mind of a Leftist is a strange thing. To them, black can be white, if I may risk using those terms

If Harvard really is forced to admit purely on merit without regard to race, its student body will shortly become mainly Asian, with a white minority of mainly Jews. Much heartburn! We can be sure that who is actually admitted in the near future will be very carefully and widely scrutinized so Harvard will not easily be able to slide around the law.

What Harvard will do has however already been foreshadowed: Blacks will be considered to have endured "Hardship" and will be admitted on those grounds. But a lot of immigrant Asians will have claims of real hardship, so the lawsuits will keep coming. In a rerun of the Bakke case, some smart working class white or Asian kid will challenge the selection of a middle-class black kid and the fun will begin. I would not like to be in the shoes of any black kid who does get selected though. He will be minutely scrutinized


The 6-3 ruling could drastically alter college admissions policies across the country. Criticizing the decision, President Biden said this was “not a normal court” and directed the Education Department “to analyze what practices can build a more inclusive and diverse” student body.

Race-conscious admissions programs at Harvard and the University of North Carolina are unconstitutional, the Supreme Court ruled on Thursday, the latest decision by its conservative supermajority upending decades of jurisprudence on a contentious issue of American life.

Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., writing for the 6-3 majority, said the two programs “unavoidably employ race in a negative manner” and “involve racial stereotyping,” in a manner that violates the Constitution.

Universities can consider how race has affected a student’s life — a topic they may write about in an application essay, for example — but he warned schools not to use such considerations as a surreptitious means of racial selection. “Universities may not simply establish through the application essays or other means the regime we hold unlawful today,” he wrote.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor summarized her dissent from the bench — a rare move that signals profound disagreement. The court, she wrote, was “further entrenching racial inequality in education, the very foundation of our democratic government and pluralistic society.”

“The devastating impact of this decision cannot be overstated,” she wrote.

The decision reflects the country’s division over affirmative action, which breaks along racial and political lines, and could have far-reaching effects. Beyond forcing colleges and universities across the country to revisit their admissions practices, the ruling could set the stage for challenges to diversity efforts in the business world.

President Biden assailed the ruling in a televised address hours after it was handed down, saying the country could not allow the decision to be “the last word” on the issue of affirmative action.

“Discrimination still exists in America,” he said, repeating his words for emphasis. “Today’s decision does not change that.”

Mr. Biden paused before leaving his remarks as a reporter asked if the court was “rogue.” “This is not a normal court,” he responded.

The opinions in the case — including concurring opinions from Justices Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch and Brett M. Kavanaugh and another dissenting opinion from Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson — total 237 pages. (Justice Jackson recused herself from the Harvard case because she had been on the university’s board of overseers.)

Chief Justice Roberts, who has long been skeptical of racial preferences, emphasized that students “must be treated based on his or her experiences as an individual.” That is likely to make admissions essays a crucial way for students to discuss their racial and ethnic backgrounds.

Mr. Biden offered guidance to colleges about how to move forward, proposing they take into account the adversity a student has overcome when choosing applicants from the pool of students that meet their admission standards. Colleges “should not abandon their commitment to ensure student bodies of diverse backgrounds that reflect all of America,” he said.

The two cases were brought by Students for Fair Admissions, a group founded by Edward Blum, a legal activist who has organized many lawsuits challenging race-conscious admissions policies and voting rights laws, several of which have reached the Supreme Court. He said his organization would be “vigilant” in making sure colleges and universities adhere to the ruling, warning their leaders not to try to create workarounds in order to consider race.

Conservative leaders and advocacy groups celebrated the ruling. Matt Schlapp, the chairman of the American Conservative Union, one of the nation’s largest conservative groups, said that the affirmative action ruling Thursday, coupled with the Supreme Court’s decision last year that ended the constitutional right to abortion, “serve as a triumphant return to restoring our tattered Constitution.”

Nine states already ban the use of race-conscious college admissions at their public universities, and their experience could provide a sign of the ruling’s consequences.

Congressional Democrats condemned Thursday’s Supreme Court decision dismantling race-conscious college admissions as a step backward for racial justice, while Republicans largely celebrated the ruling, saying it would make the process more fair.

Democrats predicted that the decision would diminish progress on racial justice, and many committed to continue pressing for equal opportunity.

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2023/06/29/us/affirmative-action-supreme-court

*********************************************************