The U.S. Supreme Court handed down a major ruling on affirmative action Thursday, rejecting the use of race as a factor in college admissions as a violation of the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause.
Many universities have argued that race-based admissions ensures that student bodies remain diverse, while critics such as the plaintiffs in the cases argue the policy discriminates against many qualified students based on race.
Students for Fair Admissions, a student activist group, brought cases against both Harvard and University of North Carolina. The group initially sued Harvard College in 2014 for violating 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."
The complaint against Harvard alleged that the school's practices penalized Asian American students, and that they failed to employ race-neutral practices. The North Carolina case raised the issue of whether the university could reject the use of non-race-based practices without showing that they would bring down the school's academic quality or negatively impact the benefits gained from campus diversity.
JUSTICES HEAR ARGUMENTS OVER AFFIRMATIVE ACTION IN HARVARD, UNC SUPREME COURT CASES
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit had ruled in Harvard's favor, upholding the outcome of a district court bench trial. The district court said that the evidence against Harvard was inconclusive and that "the observed discrimination" affected only a small pool of Asian American students. It ruled that SFFA did not have standing in the case.
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson recused herself from the Harvard case due to her previous role on Harvard's Board of Overseers.
In the UNC case, a federal district court ruled in the school's favor, saying that its admissions practices withstood strict scrutiny.
The affirmative action cases gave rise to one of the most spirited court debates to occur within the Supreme Court building this past term, with Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito grilling Harvard's lawyer, Seth Waxman.
Alito pressed Waxman on why it is that Asian American students regularly receive lower personal scores on their applications than other races. Waxman talked around the justice's questions, causing Alito to get frustrated with the lawyer.
"I still haven't heard any explanation for the disparity between the personal scores that are given to Asians," Alito said.
Waxman then got into a tense back-and-forth with Roberts. The justice asked why Waxman was downplaying race as a factor in admissions decisions, when according to Roberts it must have some impact, or else it would not be included.
AFFIRMATIVE ACTION CASE: JUSTICES ALITO, ROBERTS SNAP AT HARVARD LAWYER
KETANJI BROWN JACKSON CLASHES WITH ANTI-AFFIRMATIVE ACTION LAWYER DURING SUPREME COURT ARGUMENTS
Waxman admitted that race was decisive "for some highly qualified applicants," just like "being … an oboe player in a year in which the Harvard-Radcliffe Orchestra needs an oboe player."
"We did not fight a civil war about oboe players," Roberts shot back. "We did fight a civil war to eliminate racial discrimination."
Fox News' Tyler Olson contributed to this report.
