Current:Home > ContactHarvard, universities across U.S. react to Supreme Court's affirmative action ruling -StockSource
Harvard, universities across U.S. react to Supreme Court's affirmative action ruling
View
Date:2025-04-12 13:10:20
The Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that affirmative action in higher education is unconstitutional, arguing that the race-conscious admission policies of Harvard College and the University of North Carolina violate the Constitution.
"Both programs lack sufficiently focused and measurable objectives warranting the use of race, unavoidably employ race in a negative manner, involve racial stereotyping, and lack meaningful end points," Chief Justice John Roberts said in the majority opinion. "We have never permitted admissions programs to work in that way, and we will not do so today."
In her dissent, Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote that the majority opinion contradicts "the vision of equality embodied in the Fourteenth Amendment."
"The court cements a superficial rule of colorblindness as a constitutional principle in an endemically segregated society where race has always mattered and continues to matter," Sotomayor said.
In response to the court's decision, Harvard said in a statement that it will comply with the new ruling, but that it will need to navigate how to preserve and uphold its "essential values."
"We write today to reaffirm the fundamental principle that deep and transformative teaching, learning, and research depend upon a community comprising people of many backgrounds, perspectives, and lived experiences," Harvard's leadership said. "That principle is as true and important today as it was yesterday."
The university acknowledged that the diverse backgrounds of its students and faculty are important factors and should not be ignored.
"To prepare leaders for a complex world, Harvard must admit and educate a student body whose members reflect, and have lived, multiple facets of human experience," the statement read. "No part of what makes us who we are could ever be irrelevant."
In his own statement , Kevin M. Guskiewicz, chancellor for the University of North Carolina, said the school was disappointed by the decision, but that it will follow the court's guidance.
Guskiewicz was among several college administrators who indicated that the court's decision could create uncertainty and confusion regarding admissions procedures moving forward.
"I know that this decision may raise questions about our future and how we fulfill our mission and live out our values," Guskiewicz said. "But Carolina is built for this, and we have been preparing for any outcome."
The consideration of race in admissions for public universities is already banned in nine states: California, Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Oklahoma, New Hampshire, Nebraska and Washington — but Thursday's ruling will now also impact private universities in these states.
Michael V. Drake, president of the University of California system, which oversees nine public schools in the state, said in a statement that the ruling ends a "valuable practice that has helped higher education institutions increase diversity and address historical wrongs over the past several decades."
"The consideration of race was not the conclusive solution to inequities in college admissions, but it was a necessary pathway to addressing systemic deficiencies," Drake wrote. "Without it, we must work much harder to identify and address the root causes of societal inequities that hinder diverse students in pursuing and achieving a higher education."
In her response, Carol Folt, University of Southern California president, wrote that "we will not go backward."
"This decision will not impact our commitment to creating a campus that is welcoming, diverse, and inclusive to talented individuals from every background," Folt said.
Columbia University said that it is still working to understand the full implications of the ruling.
"Diversity is a positive force across every dimension of Columbia, and we can and must find a durable and meaningful path to preserve it," university spokesperson Ben Chang said in a statement.
Ron Daniels, president of Johns Hopkins University, called the court's ruling a "significant setback in our efforts to build a university community that represents the rich diversity of America."
"This is particularly distressing given the long history of racial discrimination in our country and the relatively brief period of time during which we have succeeded in recruiting significant numbers of outstanding underrepresented students to Johns Hopkins," Daniels said.
Rice University officials also called the ruling "disappointing."
"From a campus in the heart of the United States' most diverse city, we will continue our efforts to create a class of students that is multifaceted in race, gender, ideology, ability, geography and special talents," Rice President Reginald DesRoches and Provost Amy Dittmar said in a joint statement. "Such diversity is critical in solving the most perplexing, challenging problems already known, and those we have not yet encountered."
The University of Pennsylvania said it will fully comply with the decision, but will continue to admit students with wide-ranging backgrounds and experiences.
"In full compliance with the Supreme Court's decision, we will seek ways to admit individual students who will contribute to the kind of exceptional community that is essential to Penn's educational mission," the statement from UPenn President Liz Magill and Provost John L. Jackson, Jr. read.
- In:
- University of North Carolina
- Supreme Court of the United States
- College
- University of California
- Harvard
Simrin Singh is a social media producer and trending content writer for CBS News.
veryGood! (7733)
Related
- Travis Hunter, the 2
- DeSantis signs bills that he says will keep immigrants living in the US illegally from Florida
- From 4-leaf clovers to some unexpected history, all you need to know about St. Patrick’s Day
- Steelers trade QB Kenny Pickett to Eagles, clearing way for Russell Wilson to start, per reports
- Will the 'Yellowstone' finale be the last episode? What we know about Season 6, spinoffs
- What makes people happy? California lawmakers want to find out
- 'Manhunt' review: You need to watch this wild TV series about Lincoln's assassination
- Sam Bankman-Fried deserves 40 to 50 years in prison for historic cryptocurrency fraud, prosecutors say
- See you latte: Starbucks plans to cut 30% of its menu
- Weekly ski trip turns into overnight ordeal when about 50 women get stranded in bus during snowstorm
Ranking
- $73.5M beach replenishment project starts in January at Jersey Shore
- Eva Mendes Thanks Ryan Gosling For “Holding Down the Fort” While She Conquers Milan Fashion Week
- Colorado man bitten by pet Gila monster died of complications from the desert lizard’s venom
- A local Arizona elections chief who quit in a ballot counting dispute just got a top state job
- 'Kraven the Hunter' spoilers! Let's dig into that twisty ending, supervillain reveal
- Jets to sign longtime Cowboys star Tyron Smith to protect Aaron Rodgers, per reports
- Utah governor replaces social media laws for youth as state faces lawsuits
- Love Is Blind's Cameron Hamilton Reveals Why He and Lauren Weren't at the Season 6 Reunion
Recommendation
New data highlights 'achievement gap' for students in the US
Florida mom tried selling daughter to stranger for $500, then abandoned the baby, police say
Maui’s mayor prioritizes housing and vows to hire more firefighters after Lahaina wildfire
Prosecutors seek from 40 to 50 years in prison for Sam Bankman-Fried for cryptocurrency fraud
Justice Department, Louisville reach deal after probe prompted by Breonna Taylor killing
PETA tells WH, Jill Biden annual Easter Egg Roll can still be 'egg-citing' with potatoes
Top remaining NFL free agents: Ranking the 25 best players still available
Jurors weigh fate of Afghan refugee charged with murder in a case that shocked Muslim community