The Ivy League school filed its brief Monday in one of the most highly anticipated of the court’s upcoming cases. After the court’s recent overturning of Roe v. Wade and the expansion of concealed-carry gun rights, the abolition of affirmative action at elite universities is high on conservatives’ wish list.
The Supreme Court has previously upheld and
Harvard said in its brief that those cases were correctly decided and urged the court not to adopt a requirement for “color-blindness” in admissions.
“Absolute neutrality has never been a universal constitutional principle,” Harvard argued, saying that the framers of the Constitution’s 14th Amendment saw race-conscious measures as necessary to ensure Black people’s “equal participation in society” following the Civil War.
The Supreme Court has become more conservative since it considered an affirmative-action challenge in 2003. The court earlier this year decided to consider lawsuits against both Harvard and the
The court last week
A date for oral arguments in the cases has not yet been set. Based on their normal scheduling practices, the justices will probably hear the Harvard and UNC cases separately in the two-week session that starts Oct. 31. Decisions in both cases would likely come by July of next year.
Affirmative action is common at selective universities, though nine states, including California and Florida, ban race-conscious admissions at public institutions.
In a separate filing on Monday, North Carolina Attorney General
In a brief filed in May, Students for Fair Admissions said universities are using the 2003 Supreme Court ruling “as a license to engage in outright racial balancing.” Edward Blum, the group’s founder, declined to comment on Harvard’s Monday filing.
Students for Fair Admissions says Harvard penalizes Asian Americans during the admissions process, assigning them lower ratings on leadership and likability, while automatically giving preferences to Black and Hispanic applicants.
In its new filing, Harvard rejected contentions that its admissions policy discriminates against Asian-Americans. It also said no other approach would ensure it could assemble a class comprising students of different backgrounds.
“Harvard must be allowed to consider race as one of many characteristics in admissions to achieve the compelling benefits of student-body diversity,” the college argued.
The Boston-based 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the Harvard policy in a 2-0 ruling.
(Updates with excerpt from North Carolina filing in 10th paragraph.)
--With assistance from
To contact the reporter on this story:
To contact the editors responsible for this story:
© 2022 Bloomberg L.P. All rights reserved. Used with permission.