On October 31, the Supreme Court will hear two new affirmative action cases, one from the University of North Carolina and the other from Harvard University, with regards to each elite university’s admissions process.
According to the plaintiffs, who are represented by Students for Fair Admissions, the elite universities have been unfairly discriminating against Asian Americans, who are admitted at far lower rates relative to Caucasian students, in spite of having higher test scores on average.
The University of North Carolina has argued against the charges of discrimination, insisting that “dozens” of different factors are considered when the admissions panel is evaluating an applicant’s potential in order to have as diverse a as class as possible.
These considerations, per the university, include “geography, military status, and socioeconomic background.”
The university application process in general has come under fire for potential preferential treatment to its applicants, holding applicants from some racial demographics to far higher standards than others.
While the University of North Carolina did not openly admit that race is a factor, students and alumni organizations have argued that race should be a factor in admissions.
In July, 25 different Harvard University student and alumni organizations wrote a brief that declared admissions based upon race are the best for ensuring “participation by members of all racial and ethnic groups in the civic life of our Nation.”
These two affirmative action cases constitute the first that the Supreme Court has heard since the conservative supermajority was successfully established under former President Trump, despite liberal antics.
Previously, the Supreme Court upheld the affirmative action precedent in 2016, though it was voted against by Chief Justice John Roberts, Justice Samuel Alito, and Justice Clarence Thomas.
Now, with a conservative supermajority, the precedents set in 2016 regarding affirmative action may be reversed.
The Department of Justice has attempted to sway Supreme Court opinion, chiefly by urging the justices to continue upholding affirmative action policies.
These content links are provided by Content.ad. Both Content.ad and the web site upon which the links are displayed may receive compensation when readers click on these links. Some of the content you are redirected to may be sponsored content. View our privacy policy here.
To learn how you can use Content.ad to drive visitors to your content or add this service to your site, please contact us at [email protected].
Family-Friendly Content
Website owners select the type of content that appears in our units. However, if you would like to ensure that Content.ad always displays family-friendly content on this device, regardless of what site you are on, check the option below. Learn More
These content links are provided by Content.ad. Both Content.ad and the web site upon which the links are displayed may receive compensation when readers click on these links. Some of the content you are redirected to may be sponsored content. View our privacy policy here.
To learn how you can use Content.ad to drive visitors to your content or add this service to your site, please contact us at [email protected].
Family-Friendly Content
Website owners select the type of content that appears in our units. However, if you would like to ensure that Content.ad always displays family-friendly content on this device, regardless of what site you are on, check the option below. Learn More
