On June 29, 2023, the Supreme Court ruled against race-conscious affirmative action in higher education admissions. The court held 6-3 that admissions that consider race in any stage of the process violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment in the United States Constitution, which guarantees a citizen should not be deprived of life, liberty, and property without due process of law (Sidley 2023).
Affirmative action describes a set of policies aimed to benefit marginalized groups. Supporters typically justify implementing any form of affirmative action to repair social and economic disparities that disadvantage those who benefit from the practice. Dissenters hold that the system is a form of discrimination which favors marginalized peoples and unjustly disadvantages others (Wikipedia 2024). The aforementioned 2023 Supreme Court ruling regarded race-conscious admissions–a form of affirmative action–in higher education that emphasized increasing the populations of Black, Latin, and other racial minorities on campus, thereby decreasing the white and Asian populations.
Statisticians predicted that the reversal of affirmative action would reduce the number of Black and Latin students and increase the number of Asian and white students in colleges and universities. Indeed, around 75% of schools saw a decrease in Black enrollment in their most recent class. Amherst College, for example, saw a decrease of the Black population among incoming freshmen from 11% to 3%. At Columbia University, the Asian population of incoming freshmen increased from 30% to 39%. Some schools, however, such as Yale and Harvard, saw no difference in demographics for Black and Asian students, respectively. Notably, major news outlets such as The New York Times choose not to report data on the white student population in favor of purely selecting data pertaining to racial minorities. Still, the percentage of white students in higher education has increased nationally (Hartocollis and Saul 2024).
This data, however, is not conclusive: the facts do not reveal all the components on which enrollment depends, though the reversal of affirmative action certainly explains the general trend of the data (the rise of Asian and white student populations; decline in Black and Latin student populations) (Murphy, 2024). Some experts believe that the general trend is not nearly as dramatic as expected due to applicants withholding their race from applications, the selection of white legacy applicants over Asian applicants, and more. Those against the Supreme Court ruling may conclude that the aftermath of the ruling confirms that affirmative action is necessary for creating diversity and bridging inequity; those for it may conclude that the data attests to the fact that campuses can be diverse without race-conscious admissions.
As supported by statistics, the reversal of affirmative action has changed the admissions process for applicants by removing race as a consideration and therefore reshaping the racial makeup of schools. The ruling stagnated whatever long-term social impact, if any, would result from affirmative action. As data continues to be released, the effects of the Supreme Court decision – be they described as ramifications or advancements – will become more apparent.