The group that won a fight to ban affirmative action in college admissions at the Supreme Court this summer is taking its fight to the next frontier — the U.S. Military Academy.
The group, Students for Fair Admissions, was behind the lawsuit that led the Supreme Court to strike down race-conscious admissions at Harvard University and the University of North Carolina, a decision that has upended admissions programs at colleges and universities across the country and has seen sweeping effects on industries that push DEI initiatives.
HOW THE AIR FORCE SPENT 25 HOURS HUNTING FOR MISSING $80 MILLION STEALTH JET AFTER IN-AIR ‘MISHAP’
“For most of its history, West Point has evaluated cadets based on merit and achievement,” the group said in its complaint, filed on Tuesday in the Southern District of New York. However, SFFA said the academy’s merit-based evaluations have altered in recent years.
“Instead of admitting future cadets based on objective metrics and leadership potential, West Point focuses on race,” the complaint states. The Pentagon declined to comment to the Washington Examiner.
Though the Supreme Court ruled against affirmative action at higher education institutions in June, the court’s 6-3 majority opinion specified it did not have any immediate impact on military academies.
“No military academy is a party to these cases, however, and none of the courts below addressed the propriety of race-based admissions systems in that context,” according to a footnote in the decision. “This opinion also does not address the issue, in light of the potentially distinct interests that military academies may present.”
Students for Fair Admissions saw the explicit footnote as an attempt to push the envelope after the sweeping ruling this summer. The group had hinted for weeks that they intended to file a lawsuit against West Point, launching the website westpointnotfair.com shortly after the court’s ruling in the Harvard and UNC cases to solicit plaintiffs in the case.
Still, SFFA’s Edward Blum publicly expressed hope that a lawsuit would not be necessary.
“Students for Fair Admissions hopes that there will be some clarification from the service academies, in which they will state that they will comport with the Supreme Court’s opinion in Harvard and UNC … and not use race as a factor in their admissions process,” Blum told the Washington Examiner in August. “We hope that we don’t have to sue them. However, if that statement is not forthcoming, then Students for Fair Admissions is likely to bring a challenge to the service academies’ continued use of race and ethnicity.”
The landmark ruling against affirmative action has created inroads this summer for a litigious push by conservative groups who say similar policies in everyday industries should be subject to similar scrutiny. Lawyers took the ruling that held the universities’ admissions policies violated the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment one step further, seeking to challenge big law firms with DEI initiatives and even taking on some of their clients with similar hiring initiatives.
At least two major law firms, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher and Morrison & Foerster, have altered respective programming language from mentioning historical underrepresentation in eligibility criteria for certain scholarship opportunities.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
Morrison & Foerster changed its language after a lawsuit was filed by another group led by Blum, known as the American Alliance for Equal Rights.
A spokesperson for West Point told the Washington Examiner, “The U.S. Military Academy does not comment on ongoing litigation to protect the integrity of its outcome for all parties involved.“
