Supreme Court Bans Affirmative Action At U.S. Colleges, Rhode Island Schools React

RHODE ISLAND — The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday ended race-conscious affirmative action policies similar to those used for decades by some Rhode Island colleges and universities to increase diversity on their campuses.

In a 6-3 decision, the court held that race-conscious admissions programs at Harvard and the University of North Carolina violate the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment, effectively eliminating the ability of colleges and universities to use affirmative action to achieve a racially diverse student body.

The majority opinion by Chief Justice John Roberts said the court has "permitted race-based admissions only within the confines of narrow restrictions. University programs must comply with strict scrutiny, they may never use race as a stereotype or negative, and — at some point — they must end."

Several colleges and universities in Rhode Island spoke out against the ruling, arguing affirmative action policies in admissions strengthened school diversity, opportunities, and education.

Brown University President Christina Paxson expressed "deep disappointment" in the court's ruling, saying it "upended decades of precedent." Paxson said Brown University will comply with the law but will conduct a legal review of the 237-page opinion this summer to determine the school's future diversity strategy.

"As we analyze the decision, I want to underscore that Brown is and will remain firmly committed to advancing the diversity and inclusion that is central to achieving the highest standards of academic excellence and preparing our students to grow and lead in a complex world," Paxson said. "We know that Brown is strongest when people learn and work together in environments in which they are supported and respected for who they are. This will continue at Brown."

Roger Williams University President Ioannis Miaoulisalso said the school will find a way to following the law while ensuring campus diversity.

"While we will abide by the Supreme Court’s ruling in Students for Fair Admissions Inc. v. President & Fellows of Harvard College, the decision does not change who we are as a university or the diverse community we are working to build and aspire to become," Miaoulisalso said. "RWU remains committed to recruiting and supporting a diverse student community, and we will continue to uphold our values and commitments in our efforts."

"In the weeks ahead, we will come together as a university to support each other," Miaoulisalso added. "We will be sharing details soon for various ways we will come together in support and solidarity to discuss the impact of this ruling."

The two separate but similar cases before the court — Students for Fair Admissions v. University of North Carolina and Students for Fair Admissions v. President and Fellows of Harvard College — were brought by a conservative activist group that argues the Constitution forbids the use of race-conscious admissions policies.

The plaintiffs asked the justices to strike down the landmark 1978 ruling in Regents of the University of California v. Bakke that upheld schools’ use of race-conscious admissions policies, and Grutter v. Bollinger, a 2003 case affirming it. Writing for the majority in that case, Justice Sandra Day O’Connor said the University of Michigan Law School’s use of a race-conscious admissions program did not unduly harm non-minority candidates.

Specifically, the plaintiffs argue Harvard’s policy violates Title VI of the Civil Rights Act prohibiting institutions that receive federal funding from discriminating based on race. Because of the policies, they argued, Asian American students were less likely to be admitted to Harvard than similarly qualified white, Black or Hispanic applicants.

The group argued the University of North Carolina violated the 14th Amendment’s equal protections clause, which bars racial discrimination by government entities, by considering race when it’s not necessary to do so to achieve a racially diverse student body.

In the North Carolina case, lawyer Patrick Strawbridge told the justices “racial classifications are wrong,” as established in Brown v. Board of Education, saying the Supreme Court’s 1954 landmark ruling striking down racial segregation in public schools.

Students for Fair Admissions, the group that brought the lawsuits against Harvard and the University of North Carolina, is headed by Edward Blum, a conservative legal strategist who has spent years fighting affirmative action.

In a statement after the court agreed to hear the case, Blum said both Harvard and the University of North Carolina “have racially gerrymandered their freshman classes in order to achieve prescribed racial quotas.”

“Every college applicant should be judged as a unique individual, not as some representative of a racial or ethnic group,” he said at the time.

Blum also bankrolled a 2016 Supreme Court case Fisher v. University of Texas, in which a white student said she had been denied admission to the school because of her race. In that case, the court narrowly upheld race-conscious admissions policy, but warned that not all affirmative action policies would pass constitutional muster.

Many predominantly white colleges and universities developed affirmative action plans in the 1960s and 1970s as they struggled to attract people from historically disadvantaged and underrepresented communities. Polices were also created to promote greater inclusion of women.

Since the late 1970s, the Supreme Court has three times upheld affirmative action on the grounds that institutions have a compelling interest to address past discrimination that shut nonwhite students out of higher learning. Justices have also agreed with arguments that more diverse student bodies promoted cross-racial understanding.

Race is among a confluence of admissions standards, including grades, test scores and extracurricular activities, but institutions say it can be a deciding factor when considering large numbers of equally qualified students for a limited number of spots.

About a quarter of schools said in a 2019 National Association of College Admission Counseling survey said race had a “considerable” or “moderate” influence on admissions, while nearly 60 percent said race had no influence at all.

Nine states — Arizona, California, Florida, Idaho, Michigan, Nebraska, New Hampshire, Oklahoma and Washington — have banned race-based admissions policies at public colleges and universities.

Affirmative action hasn’t cured inequities in education, Sarah Hinger senior staff attorney in the Racial Justice Program at the American Civil Liberties Union, recently told EducationWeek, “but it has been an important tool in an effort to at least partially recognize the substantial inequities that exist and that people are positioned with when applying to colleges, and on college campuses.”

The Associated Press contributed reporting.