The Supreme Court is set to rule any day on a case that could prevent universities from considering race as a factor in their admissions process, potentially throwing a wrench in the process many top U.S. institutions use.
The conservative-leaning court is considering two similar cases against Harvard University and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill brought on by the conservative group Students for Fair Admissions, which has argued the schools’ admission processes have discriminated against white and Asian American applicants.
If the court rules for the students, the decision would upend decades of precedent for the limited use of race as a factor in the process, making it one of the biggest reversals for the Supreme Court since it overturned Roe v. Wade last year.
The case also has the potential to force many of the country’s top institutions to change the way they admit students and find race-neutral alternatives to promote diversity in their institutions.
Here’s what you need to know ahead of the court’s decision:
The admissions process looks different at every college, with some taking race and ethnicity into consideration while others did not.
Schools were already limited on using race-based admissions after previous Supreme Court cases said its consideration had to be specifically tailored to each individual and there could be no quotas to have students of certain backgrounds.
Universities have had to take on a holistic approach where race can be one factor in a line of others such as test scores, high school grades and extracurricular activities.
Schools have insisted there are no points deducted if someone is a member of a certain race.
It is hard to get an exact count of how many colleges consider race or ethnicity in their admissions, but the practice is more commonly found in highly competitive schools, which are bombarded with many quality applications, where the smallest distinction could make or break acceptance.
There are already nine states that have banned the consideration of race in college applications: Arizona, California, Florida, Idaho, Michigan, Nebraska, New Hampshire, Oklahoma and Washington.
If the Supreme Court rules against Harvard and Chapel Hill, schools that use race or ethnicity as a boost on a person’s application will immediately have to stop the practice. Many will be looking at race-neutral ways to support diversity in their admissions.
If the court does not give a clear definition of race-neutral practices, it would be up to schools to determine how to give equal opportunity to all backgrounds in the process without distinctively basing it on race or ethnicity.
During oral arguments, the justices floated ideas such as socio-economic considerations and allowing students to mention race in their college essays when describing their life and experiences with discrimination.
Considering race in admissions began in the Civil Rights era in order to make up for societal inequities as racial minorities had fewer educational or economic opportunities due to past discrimination they faced.
States that have banned affirmative action in college admissions have seen drops in minority enrollment.
Depending on how the court rules, opponents believe it could also limit minorities in their applications by having to hide who they are and what type of obstacles they have faced in life due to their background.
“But now we’re — we’re entertaining a rule in which some people can say the things they want, about who they are and have that valued in the system. But other people are not going to be able to. Because they won’t be able to reveal that they’re Latino or African American or whatever. And I’m worried that that creates an inequity in the system,” Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson said during oral arguments.
The Students for Fair Admissions organization feel that race-conscious admissions is unfair to white people and Asian Americans.
Even their attorneys in the cases said they agree there is a need for diversity on campus, but they believe schools can come up with alternative ways to create a diverse student body.
The liberal-leaning Century Foundation say that states that have already banned race-conscious admissions have come up with relatively successful alternatives, but those successes have been disputed by others.
Some of the alternatives include guaranteeing admission to the top 10 percent of high school graduates at all schools in the state, or changes to recruitment strategy.
“I don’t see how you can say that the program will ever end,” Chief Justice John Roberts told the lawyer for Chapel Hill in the oral arguments last year. “Your position is that race matters because it’s necessary for diversity, which is necessary for the sort of education you want. It’s not going to stop mattering at some particular point, you’re always going to have to look at race because you say race matters to give us the necessary diversity.”