Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Home
Evangelical
Education and Religion
On the Students for Fair Admission v. President and Fellows of Harvard decision

On the Students for Fair Admission v. President and Fellows of Harvard decision

Last updated on: July 3, 2023 at 2:00 am by Ansley Quiros

0 Comments

On the Students for Fair Admission v. President and Fellows of Harvard decision 2023-07-02T12:01:18-04:00 Ansley Quiros

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

On Thursday June 29, the Supreme Court ruled against affirmative action in college admissions in an anticipated decision. The ruling, Students for Fair Admission, Inc. vs. President and Fellows of Harvard University and UNC, et al. overturned Grutter v. Bollinger and Fisher v. University at Texas-Austin, and set a new precedent for higher education in America.

Since, as the decision begins, “both Harvard and UNC employ a highly selective admissions process to make their decision” and those admissions decisions can depend on “a student’s grades, recommendation letters, or extracurricular involvement [and] …can also depend on their race,” the Court was tasked with determining “whether the admissions systems used by Harvard College and UNC are lawful under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.” In other words: Can race, as a category, be included in admissions systems?

In a 6-3 decision, The Supreme Court said no. Admissions offices at Harvard and UNC failed to meet the parameters set by Grutter: strict scrutiny, race-based consideration never being negative (in the case of Asian American applicants), and a definite end. Therefore, Justice Roberts wrote, the admissions programs at Harvard and UNC were unlawful in their consideration of race as a category. In explaining his reading of the Equal Protection Clause, Justice Roberts stated: “Eliminating racial discrimination means eliminating all of it.”

The Court as of June 2023

Joining Roberts were Justices Alito, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett, as well as Justice Clarence Thomas who, unusually, wrote his own, long consenting opinion in which he chronicled his own long opposition to affirmative action, personally and legally.

In response to calls not only for racial justice but for diversity in education, Thomas writes: “It may be the case that exposure to different perspectives and thoughts can foster debate, sharpen young minds, and hone students’ reasoning skills. But, it is not clear how diversity with respect to race, qua race, furthers this goal. Two white students, one from rural Appalachia and one from a wealthy San Francisco suburb, may well have more diverse outlooks on this metric than two students from Manhattan’s Upper East Side attending its most elite schools, one of whom is white and other of whom is black. If Harvard cannot even explain the link between racial diversity and education, then surely its interest in racial diversity cannot be compelling enough to overcome the constitutional limits on race consciousness.”

Justices Sotomayor, Kagan, and Jackson dissented. In the opinion, Justice Sotomayor declared, “Today, this Court stands in the way and rolls back decades of precedent and momentous progress.” “The Court,” she continues, “cements a superficial rule of colorblindness as a constitutional principle in an endemically segregated society where race has always mattered and continues to matter.” Saying a society should be colorblind does not make it so. And, of course, the Court in other cases, knows this. Sotomayor explains: “what the Court actually lands on is an understanding of the Constitution that is “colorblind” sometimes, when the Court so chooses. Behind those choices lie the Court’s own value judgments about what type of interests are sufficiently compelling to justify race-conscious measures.”

In another withering dissent, Justice Ketanji Brown-Jackson likewise takes issue with the legal colorblindness Thomas celebrates. Her “response is simple: Our country has never been colorblind.” She then runs through a simple history of Black people in America, using the work of academics and historians such as Ira Katznelson, Isabel Wilkerson, Douglas Blackmon and Richard Rothstein before stating plainly, “History speaks.” Ignoring that historical reality will only prolong its reach, she argues. “The only way out of this morass—for all of us—is to stare at racial disparity unblinkingly, and then do what evidence and experts tell us is required to level the playing field and march forward together, collectively striving to achieve true equality for all Americans. It is no small irony that the judgment the majority hands down today will forestall the end of race-based disparities in this country, making the colorblind world the majority wistfully touts much more difficult to accomplish.”

James Meredith, in a classroom at the University of Mississippi, 1962

The arguments are fascinating, and I could spend much more time getting into them–especially the back-and-forth between Justices Thomas and Jackson–but what does the ruling mean?

Political pundits, lawyers, and school admissions officers had presumed the conservative Court would strike down affirmative action, but the decision was surprising in its narrowness. In his conclusion, Chief Justice Roberts went out of the way to state that “nothing prohibits universities from considering an applicant’s discussion of how race affected the applicant’s life, so long as that discussion is concretely tied to a quality of character or unique ability that the particular applicant can contribute to the university.”

Immediately after the decision came down Americans had strong, polarized responses. Many colleges and universities, including Harvard, responded with renewed commitment to racial diversity in education. In a statement, Harvard administrators declared their intent to comply with the ruling and “to reaffirm the fundamental principle that deep and transformative teaching, learning, and research depend on a community comprising people of many backgrounds, perspectives, and lived experiences. That principle is as true and important today as it was yesterday.”

The decision will have effects beyond undergraduate institutions. As disparate outcomes in health indicate, less diverse healthcare providers lead to unnecessary suffering and death for marginalized groups. The American Medical Association, which filed an amicus brief in the case, stated: “Today’s ruling undermines policy that was producing positive results and improving the health of our patients, as well as making all physicians better practitioners. This ruling is bad for health care, bad for medicine, and undermines the health of our nation.” I think its safe to assume that the ruling will mean that many, if not all, schools become even less diverse than they are. Examples from California and Michigan bear this out.

So what are we to make of this?

First, as Americans, the ruling seems to indicate that the nation is moving away from a commitment to racial parity. Recent decades have seen a resurgence in white supremacists and in the politics of racial grievance and the decision seems to affirm these exclusionary impulses. This, as Justice Jackson, writes, is a “tragedy for everyone” As much social science research indicates, without a conscious amelioration of generations of oppression, racial stratification due to uneven allocation of resources compounds. In this instance, legacy students, those whose parents and grandparents had the education, means and right to attend elite colleges, receive preferential admission, ensuring that, unless another Court intervenes, generation privilege accrues. Race-blindness is no protection against racial discrimination in a society already so struck through historically and culturally with racial division. The work of redress must be done to achieve a democratic nation. It seems clear this is a step backwards from that goal.

What about as educators? The ruling will almost certainly have some effect on elite schools like UNC and Harvard. But, as mentioned above, the wording of the decision does not forestall these institutions from admitting diverse students for whom race has affected their life experiences. But honestly, the fierce competition for spots in the nation’s elite colleges does not reflect the reality for the vast majority of the nation’s institutions for higher education. Most schools, including my own, clamor for students, from whatever race and background. Many colleges are facing steep declines in admission due to COVID, higher wages for non-college educated workers, and the so-called “birth-dearth.” Liberal arts colleges, public regional universities, and community colleges are ready to welcome diverse students and offer educational experiences every bit as valuable as R1s and Ivies. Interestingly, Justice Thomas obliquely refers to this in his concurring opinion. ““Affirmative action” policies do nothing to increase the overall number of blacks and Hispanics able to access a college education,” he writes. “Rather, those racial policies simply redistribute individuals among institutions of higher learning, placing some into more competitive institutions than they otherwise would have attended.” While Thomas’ implications here are insulting, it is true that institutions of higher learning exist outside of the U.S. News and World Report’s top ten. Notably, HBCU enrollment is on the rise. Students of color can rest assured that there are many schools anxious to have them and their beautiful presence on campus. We are ready to teach all of our students with excellence and fairness.

Finally, what might we as Christians make of this? Of course, there are many options, as our identities and experiences figure in. But a few thoughts. On the one hand, simple quotas based on race are at best simplistic and at worst can lend themselves towards racist exclusion, as has happened in the not so distant past. Some of the vitriol directed at Asian and Asian American applicants has been dehumanizing and abhorrent and has no place amongst believers. Neither, of course, do any efforts to discriminate against Black Americans or deny them opportunities long denied. These groups, both of whom have experienced racial discrimination and exclusion, should not be pitted against each other to benefit whites. Christians should fight strenuously to make our neighborhoods, schools, churches, and groups reflective of the diverse, beautiful family of God.

I think too that those who belong to the kingdom of God should also resist the spirit of fear and scarcity embedded in the discussion around affirmative action. So much of the discussion around affirmative action has belied a rabid fear amongst some white Americans that “their” spots are being taken by less deserving minorities. Not only is this not true, it is inherently unChristian. Yes, certain educational and economic opportunities can be determinative of success. (Of course this dovetails into another recent Court decision on student debt, but I digress…) But rather than competing for a very limited number of seats on a track to wealth and prestige, what if we created more seats in more places open to more people? And honored those paths and the gifts God has given to people.Christians can and should hire qualified applicants from non-elite universities in their law firms and corporations and admit them to medical schools and graduate programs. We serve a God of abundance and we must resist the scarcity mindset for ourselves, our children and grandchildren. We have not been given a spirit of fear but of power and of love. Let’s get to work pursuing the work of racial justice and equity, and also building a world full of hope and opportunity for all of God’s people to pursue their unique callings–for the betterment of all and for God’s glory.

General Christian

Education and Religion

Academia

Ansley Lillian Quiros

Previous Post

June 29, 2023

American History and the Caribbean Dimension

Next Post

July 4, 2023 Medieval Christian Nationalism? Crusades and Christian Nations

Recent Comments

0 | Leave a Comment

"Life Force is a guilty pleasure of mine! Not a great film, but a fun ..."

philipjenkins

Fairies, Witches, Folk Horror, and the ..."

"I love horror but would have to acclimate back to Lovecraft and especially Machen. Have ..."

Terry

Fairies, Witches, Folk Horror, and the ..."

"Very good point about MacDonald.I am certainly a Machen fan!"

philipjenkins

Fairies, Witches, Folk Horror, and the ..."

"The Scottish author George MacDonald integrated fairy world into his fiction in a way that ..."

Terry

Fairies, Witches, Folk Horror, and the ..."

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category abolitionism Abortion Abraham Joshua Heschel Abraham Kuyper Abraham Lincoln Academia Activism Adam Renberg Advent Adventist africa African American Religion Agnes Howard Albert Camus American History American Religious History American Revolution American West Anabaptists Ancient History Andrea Turpin Andrei Tarkovsky Anglicanism Annales Ansley Lillian Quiros anti-Catholicism Antisemitism Anxious Bench apologetics Apparitions Arash Azizi Archaeology archives art Artificial Intelligence Asia Asian Americans Augustine Authors Bad Bunny Baptism Baptists Barack Obama Battle of Hastings Benjamin Franklin Bernard-Henri Levy Beth Allison Barr Beth Moore Bethany Mannon Bible Bill Cunningham Billy Graham Black Music Bob Dylan Body Boenhoffer Books Breastfeeding Bruce Springsteen C.S. Lewis Calvinism Cancel Culture Capitalism Carmelites Catholicism Cedric Robinson Cesar Chavez Charismaticism charity Charles Dickens Charles Lindbergh Che Guevara Chicago Children Chinese Christianity Chris Gehrz Christ Christian death Christian Higher Education Christian life Christian Nation Christian Nationalism Christianity Today Christmas Church life Church Practice cinema Civil Religion Civil Rights Movement Civil War civility Classics Climate Change Cold War Colonial Mexico colonialism Comer Communism community complementarianism Conference on Faith and History Congregationalism Conspiracies Conspiracy Conversion Narratives Coronavirus Costa Rica Council of Nicaea Covid-19 Creation Critical Race Theory Crusades Culture culture wars Daniel K. Williams David Barton David Swartz Death Ways death with dignity DEI democracy Democratic Party Devotion Digital Age Diplomacy discipleship diversity Donald Trump Drama Dua Lipa Early Church early modern Early modern Catholicism Easter Eastern Christianity economic exploitation Education elections Elie Wiesel Elizabeth II Elizabeth Taylor emotions Empire Engineering England enslavement Entertainment Episcopal Church Erica Ramirez eschatology Eurocentrism Evangelicalism Evangelicals Exegesis Family Feminism Film Flannery O'Connor folk music Food Foreign Policy founding fathers Franciscans Franciscus Junius fundamentalism Funerals G.K. Chesterton Gender Genocide genre geography George W. Bush George Washington George Whitefield Global Christianity Global church Grief Guadalupe guest post Guest Post gun control gun violence Gustavo Gutierrez Hamid Dabashi Harold John Ockenga Harvest Hate Hawaiian Christianity Healing health care Heather Cox Richardson Hell Heresy Hermeneutics Higher Education Hinduism Hippocratic oath Historical Fiction Historical Methodology Historical Profession Historical Profession Historical Theology Historical Thinking historiography Holidays Holocaust horror movies Human rights Humanitarian Work humanities Hummingbirds Hungary hymns Imago Dei Immigration Injustice Interviews Iran Islam Islamophobia Israel Ivan's Childhood Jacob Randolph James Bratt Janine Giordano Drake Japanese history Japanese Literature Jean Paul Sartre Jesse Miranda Jesus Jesus Christ Jimmy Carter Joan Baez Joan Didion Joanne Freeman João B. Chaves Joao Chaves Joey Cochran John Calvin John Fea John Tillotson John Turner Johnny Cash Jonathan Edwards Jonathan Tran Joseph Smith Josh Howerton Journalism Jr. Judaism Jürgen Moltmann Just War Justice Justin Brierley Karl Barth Katelyn Beaty koi ponds Kris Kristofferson Kristin Kobes Du Mez Latin American Religious History Latino Americans Lectio Divina Leisure Lent Leonard Cohen liberal arts liberalism Liberation Theology Linda Ronstadt Lisa Clark Diller Literature Lou Reed Lynchings Lynneth Miller Renberg Mainline Protestantism Malcolm Foley Marilyn Monroe Maritime history Mark Noll Marriage Martin Luther Martin Luther King Martyrdom Marxism Mary Masih Alinejad mass shootings material culture medieval Christianity Medieval Ethiopia Melissa Borja memory Mennonites Mental Health Mental Illness Methodism Mexican Americans Mexicans Mike Madrid Miles Mullin Min Jin Lee Miscarriage Missionaries Mister Rogers Mitt Romney modernity Monasticism Mormonism Motherhood Mothers of the Church Moving Music Musicals Nadya Williams Nahua Christianity Native Americans Natsume Sōseki New Contributor New England New Year New York Nico Non-Violent Protest Orthodoxy pacifism Paleo Evangelicals Palestinians Parenting Patti Smith Paul Kingsnorth Pedro Calderón de la Barca Pentecostalism Philip Jenkins Phillis Wheatley physician-assisted suicide pilgrimage Pilgrims pluralism Plutocracy Poetry Politics Pope Francis Pope Leo XIV post-modernism prayer preaching Presbyterians prosperity gospel Protest Public history Publishing Puritans purity culture Quakers race Race Massacres Racial Capitalism racial reconciliation racialization Racism Raha Bahloulipour Re-Enchantment reading Reformation Refugees religion and the university religion and war Religious Freedom Religious Nones Religious Pluralism Religious Symbols religious violence Republican Party Revival Rita Coolidge Ritual Roger Williams Roman Catholic church Royalty Russell Moore same-sex marriage Sarah Irving-Stonebraker Scandinavia Science Science and Technology Scopes trial Scriptural Interpretation secularism Selena Quintanilla seminary Seventh-Day Adventists sexual morality Sexuality Sikhs Silence slaveholders theology Slavery Slavoj Zizek social justice Social Media Southern Baptist Convention Southern Religion Spain Spiritual Autobiography Spiritual but not religious Spiritual Discipline Sports Stanley Hauerwas Suffering Summer Camps Sunday Night Odds and Ends Supernatural Supreme Court Syriac Christianity Tal Howard Taylor Swift Teaching Technology Television Thanksgiving The Beatles The Mission theater TheoBros Theology Thomas Dixon Thomas Jefferson Thomas Kidd Thomas Merton Tim Gloege Tim Walz Tom Holland Tourism tradition Tragedy Translation Transnationalism Travel Trump Ukraine Uncategorized Unitarians United Methodist Church US History Vanessa Chan Velvet Underground Verónica A. Gutiérrez Veronica Gutierrez Vikings Violence Virgin Mary Virtue Virtue ethics Visions Voting War WCTU Wendell Berry Westminster Assembly White Evangelicalism Wildfires Winnie the Pooh Witches women Women in Ministry Women's and Gender Studies Work Worship writing Yasunari Kawabata Zena Hitz

Select a Month October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 February 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 August 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

I wept and prayed at the temple, vowing to dedicate my son to the Lord's service. Who am I?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Hannah Sarah Rebekah Rachel