The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday upheld a University of Texas policy of considering race in admissions, allowing proponents of college affirmative action programs to breathe a sigh of relief.
It was a 4 to 3 decision, with Justice Anthony Kennedy joining liberal justices to form the majority. Justice Elena Kagan recused herself due to her prior work on it as U.S. solicitor general.
Justice Clarence Thomas filed a dissenting opinion, as did Justice Samuel Alito (which was joined by Thomas and Chief Justice John Roberts).
The case involved Abigail Fisher, a white female who was denied admission as an undergraduate to the University of Texas in 2008. Fisher sued the university, challenging a policy that sought to create greater diversity in the student body by considering race as a factor in admissions. She claimed it violated the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
Ultimately, the justices decided that the policy of considering race and ethnicity in admissions was narrowly tailored enough and concluded, “the race-conscious admissions program in use at the time of petitioner’s application is lawful under the Equal Protection Clause.”
Kennedy’s decision, however, cautioned that given the data now available, the university should continue to review and update its policy. “The Court’s affirmance of the University’s admissions policy today does not necessarily mean the University may rely on that same policy without refinement,” he wrote. “It is the University’s ongoing obligation to engage in constant deliberation and continued reflection regarding its admission policies.”
The justices had previously punted the case back to the lower court in 2013 with instructions that the court must decide that the university used the most limited means possible to ensure diversity. The Supreme Court decided to rehear the case after the Fifth Circuit once again ruled in favor of the university.
In his dissent, Alito argued that the Court majority did not follow the reasoning of its own 2013 decision.
“On remand, UT failed to do what our prior decision demanded,” Alito wrote. “The University has still not identified with any degree of specificity the interests that its use of race and ethnicity is supposed to serve. Its primary argument is that merely invoking ‘the educational benefits of diversity’ is sufficient and that it need not identify any metric that would allow a court to determine whether its plan is needed to serve, or is actually serving, those interests. This is nothing less than the plea for deference that we emphatically rejected in our prior decision. Today, however, the Court inexplicably grants that request.”
In his separate dissent that also joined Alito’s, Thomas argued that, “the Court’s decision today is irreconcilable with strict scrutiny, rests on pernicious assumptions about race, and departs from many of our precedents” and reaffirmed his view that, “a State’s use of race in higher education admissions decisions is categorically prohibited by the Equal Protection Clause.”
The decision immediately became a part of presidential politics, with presumptive Democratic nominee celebrating the ruling.
“The Supreme Court’s decision today in Fisher v. University of Texas is a win for all Americans,” she said in a statement. “It means that universities can continue to make diversity and inclusion central goals of their admissions processes, and means our college campuses will continue to be places where young adults of all backgrounds can learn from each other.”
