(FamilyConservationPAC.com) – On Thursday, the Supreme Court overturned racial preferences in college admissions after an Asian-American advocacy organization accused Harvard and the University of North Carolina of having discriminatory admissions practices.
The result was reached by a 6-3 vote of conservative and liberal justices, with Chief Justice John Roberts writing the majority opinion. Ketanji Brown Jackson, Elena Kagan, and Sonia Sotomayor voiced their disagreement.
An active student group called Students for Fair Admissions filed lawsuits against Harvard and the University of North Carolina. Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, which “prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin in any program or activity that receives Federal funds or other Federal financial assistance,” is what the group first accused Harvard College of breaking in 2014.
According to the complaint against Harvard, the university failed to use racial-neutral processes, and its policies punished Asian American students.
𝙃𝙐𝙂𝙀: SCOTUS just ruled 6-3:
Reverse Racism is Racism, &
𝘼𝙇𝙇 𝙍𝘼𝘾𝙄𝙎𝙈 𝙄𝙎 𝙒𝙍𝙊𝙉𝙂
Affirmative Action must “be invalidated under the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment” and Universities “may never use race as a stereotype or negative”
It’s about time. pic.twitter.com/c5XnKG5D2u
— 𝐉𝐎𝐇𝐍⚔️𝐒𝐓𝐑𝐀𝐍𝐃 (@JohnStrandUSA) June 29, 2023
The North Carolina case brought up the question of whether a university could forbid the adoption of non-racial activities without demonstrating that doing so would degrade the institution’s academic standards or harm the advantages of campus diversity.
The decision of a district court bench trial had been upheld by the First Circuit Court of Appeals in favor of Harvard.
According to the district court, “the observed discrimination” only affected a tiny group of Asian American students, and the evidence against Harvard was unclear. It concluded that SFFA lacked standing to bring the claim.
Due to her prior membership on the Board of Overseers of Harvard, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson withdrew from the Harvard case.
In the UNC case, a federal district court upheld the university’s position, finding that its admissions procedures stood up to close examination.
In the affirmative action cases, Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito interrogated Harvard’s attorney, Seth Waxman, in one of the most animated court disputes inside the Supreme Court building this past term.
Waxman was questioned by Alito on why Asian American applicants frequently obtain lower personal scores than applicants of other races. Waxman’s avoidance of the justice’s inquiries led to Alito’s annoyance with the attorney.
For the gap between the personal scores given to Asians, Alito observed, “I still haven’t heard any explanation.”
Waxman and Roberts then engaged in a tense back-and-forth. The judge questioned why Waxman was downplaying race as a deciding factor in admissions when, in Roberts’ view, “it must have some bearing, or it wouldn’t be included.”
Waxman acknowledged that “for some highly qualified applicants,” such as “being… an oboist in a year in which the Harvard-Radcliffe Orchestra needs an oboist,” race was a deciding factor.”
Roberts retorted, “We did not fight a civil war over oboe players. “We did wage a civil war to end racial prejudice.”
CNN reporter on SCOTUS banning affirmative action in college admissions: “We do not truly live in a society where race is never a consideration or a factor.”
— The Post Millennial (@TPostMillennial) June 29, 2023
This is a developing story.
Copyrightr 2023, FamilyConservationPAC.com