HOUSTON — Today's U.S. Supreme Court ruling that ends the consideration of race in college admissions was a setback for many Texas universities.
The court said the admissions policies aimed at increasing diversity on campuses across the country violate the U.S. Constitution.
The 6-3 ruling on cases involving Harvard University and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill reversed years of court precedent.
In the decision, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the majority that the admissions programs at both schools were “well-intentioned and implemented in good faith.”
But, he said, “the Court has permitted race-based college admissions only within the confines of narrow restrictions: such admissions programs must comply with strict scrutiny, may never use race as a stereotype or negative, and must — at some point — end,” adding that the admissions systems at both schools “fail each of these criteria.”
In a minority dissent, Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote that the decision “rolls back decades of precedent and momentous progress. It holds that race can no longer be used in a limited way in college admissions to achieve such critical benefits.”
“In so holding, the Court cements a superficial rule of colorblindness as a constitutional principle in an endemically segregated society,” she added.
U.S. Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee said the court is taking away opportunities for many young people with dreams of a college education.
"At a time when the Nation is getting increasingly diverse and when everyone should have a seat at the table, the Supreme Court has now slammed the door in the faces and hearts of those aspiring young people, families, and communities that represent the diverse community," Lee tweeted.
U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz said treating any American differently because of their race is a direct violation of their 14th Amendment rights.
"This is a tremendous victory for those who have suffered from explicit racial discrimination," he tweeted.
'Greatly disappointed'
In Texas, the decision will largely impact the University of Texas at Austin, which was the only public university that considered race in undergraduate admissions, and multiple private universities, such as Rice University in Houston and Southern Methodist University in Dallas.
UT-Austin tweeted its response this afternoon.
"Since the Supreme Court’s 2016 ruling in Fisher v. University of Texas, The University of Texas at Austin has continued to recruit and enroll consistently stronger classes composed of students from diverse backgrounds and perspectives, and improved graduation rates among all students, especially those who are underrepresented or first-generation.
"While doing so, the University has lawfully been considering race among many factors as part of its comprehensive and holistic admissions process. UT will make the necessary adjustments to comply with the most recent changes to the law and remains committed to offering an exceptional education to students from all backgrounds and preparing our students to succeed and change the world."
Rice University President Reginald DesRoches said they were "greatly disappointed" in the decision and their commitment to diversity won't change.
"Together, we will do everything we can — and everything we must — to maintain and expand the excellence, diversity and vibrancy of the Rice community," DesRoches said in a statement.
"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," he said. "Such diversity is critical in solving the most perplexing, challenging problems already known, and those we have not yet encountered." (Scroll down for the full statement.)
2016 affirmative action cases involving UT-Austin
The two lawsuits behind today's ruling were brought by the group Students for Fair Admission, which is led by legal strategist Edward Blum, a crusader against college admissions processes that consider race in any way.
Blum is the same strategist who convinced Texan Abigail Fisher to file a 2016 lawsuit against UT-Austin, arguing the school unfairly discriminated against her by denying her admission while accepting students of color who she argued were less academically qualified. The court narrowly sided with UT-Austin at the time.
RELATED: Read full 2016 ruling
The Court noted that the program that had the largest impact on Fisher’s chance to get into the University of Texas in 2008 was not affirmative action, but rather the Top Ten Percent Plan. That plan was put in place by the state legislature and offers admission to any students who graduate high school in Texas in the top 10% of their class. The school fills in the freshman class using a variety of other factors including a “Personal Achievement Index” which includes race.
Fisher was not in the top 10% of her class, so she fell into the other portion of the potential freshman class. The Supreme Court said because Fisher didn’t challenge the percentage part of the plan, “the record is devoid of evidence of its impact on diversity.”
In addition, the Court said the University “lacked authority to alter the percentage plan, which was mandated by the legislature. These circumstances refute any criticism that the University did not make good efforts to comply with the law.”
1996 lawsuit against UT-Austin
The 2016 case wasn't the first affirmative action case involving UT-Austin.
Two decades earlier In 1996, Cheryl Hopwood, a white woman, sued UT-Austin after she was denied admission to the university’s law school. She argued the university was using a segregated application system for students based on race which violated the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment.
The district court judge said that admissions policy needed to go but still allowed for the university to consider race in admissions in other ways. Hopwood, along with three other white men who joined the lawsuit, appealed the decision to the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which sided with the students. The Supreme Court rejected a request to hear the case, which meant that state universities in the 5th Circuit’s jurisdiction could not consider race in college admissions.
The ban on affirmative action in college admissions in Texas didn’t last long though. In 2003, the Supreme Court ruled in the case Grutter v Bollinger that the University of Michigan could consider race in its law school admissions, nullifying the 5th Circuit’s decision and allowing UT-Austin to reintroduce race-conscious admissions in some cases. Ultimately, UT-Austin became the only public university in Texas to consider race in undergraduate admissions. The University of Houston’s Law Center also considers race in its admissions.
Long legal history
The American public has debated whether universities should consider a student’s race when deciding to admit them ever since affirmative action was introduced after the Civil Rights movement to correct racial imbalances in education and the workforce born out of a segregated society. Since then, the nation’s highest court has weighed in periodically on the legality of the policy and narrowed its scope but has allowed it to stand for nearly 60 years.
The Supreme Court’s rulings Thursday come at a pivotal moment in the history of how college campuses consider race and diversity. Across the country, conservative politicians and policymakers have started to push back against the growth of diversity, equity and inclusion offices on campuses, offices that were created to ensure students from underrepresented backgrounds — including but not limited to race — feel welcome.
This year, Texas became the second state in the country to ban such offices, training and programs. Experts worry that the ban on those efforts, combined with the end of race-conscious admissions, could cement the impression that students of color are not welcome in the state’s higher education institutions and walk back decades of efforts to build more diverse campuses.
What’s next
Broadly, education policy and admissions experts across the state and country are concerned that eliminating race-conscious admissions could have larger impacts on the already slow progress many universities have made to diversify their student bodies. If schools cannot consider race in admissions and they aren’t allowed to create offices or programs that help students from underrepresented groups succeed, some also worry about the long-term impacts on graduation rates for students of color who might not get the support they need or even enroll in the first place.
During this year’s regular legislative session, in anticipation that the Supreme Court could end race-conscious college admissions this summer, Texas lawmakers passed a bill to help UT-Austin prepare for that outcome.
The bill eliminated part of the state education code that said that if a court ends race-based admissions, the cap on the percentage of students accepted through the Top 10% Plan must be lifted. Without the cap, UT-Austin would see a large influx of students and wouldn’t be able to accept any students outside those who graduate in the top 10% of their high school classes, including out-of-state students or student-athletes. By removing that piece of the education code, UT-Austin was allowed to keep its current method of accepting students in place, regardless of the Supreme Court’s decision on race-based admissions.
While some think top 10% plans could be a model for other states to spur diversity in their college campuses, some higher education policy experts also believe percentage plans like the Top 10% Plan could be the next focus of debate in Texas’ college admissions.
Ever since its inception, the Top 10% Plan has faced fierce opposition from some students and parents in middle- to upper-class suburban high schools, where they argue it’s harder to graduate in the top 10%. In the past, Gov. Greg Abbott and some state lawmakers have signaled a willingness to adjust the plan to give schools like UT-Austin more latitude to select their freshman classes.
Rice University's full statement on affirmative action
"Like many other colleges and universities, Rice has closely followed the affirmative action cases before the Supreme Court and begun to prepare for various outcomes.
"We are greatly disappointed that American universities will no longer be allowed to consider an applicant’s race as one of countless important factors in an admissions application. But, as one justice observed today, "Deeming race irrelevant in law does not make it so in life." For that reason, we are more resolute than ever that every day at Rice, we will pursue and celebrate the excellence that a richly diverse student body, filled with its manifold experiences, brings to our community of scholars.
"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. Such diversity is critical in solving the most perplexing, challenging problems already known, and those we have not yet encountered.
"Truly creative, innovative and transformative thinking and research does not happen in a vacuum or in monolithic environments. It happens when we invite, include, hear and challenge all voices, backgrounds and perspectives. Bringing people from diverse backgrounds and life experiences together in the classroom, dining halls, coffee shops and other places where students have deep discussions and discourse provides an opportunity to better understand each other and builds empathy — both of which are foundational to learning and leading. Fostering these intellectual habits takes commitment, time, energy and deep financial investment.
"As we chart our path to tomorrow, we will adapt our strategies with great respect for the legal boundaries. We will also take inspiration in our mission and time-tested “RICE” values — responsibility, integrity, community and excellence, as well as courage, curiosity and a culture of care.
"The law may change, but Rice’s commitment to diversity will not. Together, we will do everything we can — and everything we must — to maintain and expand the excellence, diversity and vibrancy of the Rice community."
This story comes from The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan media organization that informs Texans - and engages with them - about public policy, politics, government, and statewide issues. Read more here.
Disclosure: Rice University, Southern Methodist University, the University of Texas at Austin and the University of Houston have been financial supporters of The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization that is funded in part by donations from members, foundations and corporate sponsors. Financial supporters play no role in the Tribune’s journalism. Find a complete list of them here.