US Minority Preference Ruled Unconstitutional, Major Impact Expected... Biden "Strongly Opposes" (Summary)

On the 29th (local time), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled unconstitutional the so-called 'Affirmative Action' policy that favors minority groups for educational diversity in college admissions. As the minority preference admission policy, considered one of the achievements of the civil rights movement in the 1960s, disappears into history, ripple effects are expected not only in the U.S. college admission system but also across society. U.S. President Joe Biden criticized the decision as "a measure that reverses decades of precedent and important progress," saying he "strongly opposes it."

[Image source=Reuters Yonhap News]

Conservative-Reorganized U.S. Supreme Court Rules Minority Preference Admission Policy "Unconstitutional"

On the same day, the Supreme Court ruled unconstitutional in constitutional lawsuits filed by 'Students for Fair Admissions' (SFA), who claimed discrimination against white and Asian applicants, against the University of North Carolina and Harvard University by 6-3 and 6-2 votes, respectively. The nine justices of the Supreme Court consist of six conservatives and three liberals, and the rulings appear to align with their respective ideologies. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, a Harvard College graduate, did not participate in the Harvard-related decision due to a conflict of interest.

Chief Justice John Roberts, in the majority opinion, stated, "For too long, colleges have made the erroneous conclusion that the criterion for judging an individual's identity is skin color rather than skills or learning," adding, "Our constitutional history does not permit such choices." He further argued, "Students should be treated based on their individual experiences, not race." In contrast, Justice Sonia Sotomayor, in a dissenting opinion, criticized the ruling as "a retreat from decades of precedent and significant progress," saying it "further entrenches racial inequality in education, the foundation of democratic government and pluralistic society."

Earlier, SFA filed lawsuits in 2014 against the public University of North Carolina and the private Harvard University, claiming that Affirmative Action discriminated against white and Asian applicants, but lost in the first and second trials. The lower courts ruled in favor of the two universities, citing existing Supreme Court precedents that, while universities cannot allocate quotas by race, they can consider race as one of several factors.

The minority preference admission policy favoring minority groups in college admissions was created in 1961 under an executive order by then-President John F. Kennedy, during a period of active Black civil rights movements in the U.S. The order stipulated that "government agencies must take affirmative actions to ensure employment regardless of applicants' race, beliefs, skin color, or country of origin." Based on this, anti-discrimination measures were implemented in employment sectors, followed by the introduction of minority preference admission policies in various universities.

Originally intended to provide more opportunities to minorities such as Black people marginalized in the predominantly white American society, the policy later faced increasing criticism for effectively giving bonus points based on race in college admissions, which was seen as reverse discrimination against white and Asian applicants. Consequently, among the 50 U.S. states, nine?including California, Michigan, Florida, Washington, Arizona, Nebraska, Oklahoma, New Hampshire, and Idaho?have banned race-based admission preference policies in public universities.

[Image source=Reuters Yonhap News]

Wide-Ranging Aftereffects Expected... Direct Impact on Black and Hispanic Communities

The ruling is expected to cause significant upheaval as the college admission system undergoes a comprehensive review. It is anticipated that racial diversity within universities will decrease, and the social impact will be substantial.

Black and Hispanic students who previously benefited from minority preferences in admissions will inevitably face direct consequences. According to reports submitted to the court by organizations such as the Association of American Medical Colleges, the proportion of minority students in medical schools dropped by 37% after some states banned the policy. The New York Times (NYT) reported that this decision could change the composition of so-called elite universities and particularly reduce the number of Black and Hispanic students attending medical schools, law schools, and other professional degree programs. ABC News reported that after California banned the policy, admissions of Black and Hispanic students at some schools dropped by about 50%.

Opinions differ regarding the impact on Asian Americans, including Korean Americans. Some predict that the admission doors may open wider for Asian students, who often faced fierce competition due to being disadvantaged by the preference policy despite relatively high scores. Others argue that, symbolically, the ruling could ultimately have negative effects on Asian Americans by undermining efforts to alleviate social inequality. Local media have reported claims of reverse discrimination against Asians, while public opinion polls highlight that the majority of Asian Americans support the elimination of discrimination.

On the day of the ruling, Harvard University stated it would comply with the Supreme Court's decision but emphasized the value of diversity, asserting that the university should remain a place of opportunity open to the marginalized. The University of North Carolina also declared its commitment to educating students from diverse backgrounds, beliefs, income levels, and experiences. Edward Blum, founder of SFA and leader of the lawsuit, held a press conference at the Washington National Press Club, welcoming the decision as "a result that the majority of all races and ethnicities will welcome, putting an end to racial preferences in college admissions." Meanwhile, some student groups, including the Harvard Black Students Association and the Harvard Asian American Association, expressed concerns in statements that the ruling would limit educational opportunities for people of color.

[Image source=AP Yonhap News]

Biden Criticizes "Not a Normal Court"... Trump Says "Right Path"

The Supreme Court, reorganized with a conservative majority during the Trump administration, has now put a halt to minority preference policies following its ruling on abortion rights, leading to analyses that this decision could become a variable like the "second abortion rights" issue in the upcoming presidential election. Although public support is lower compared to the abortion issue, the political and social impact of this matter is considered significant locally. Politically, the Republican Party immediately welcomed the ruling, while the Democratic Party, which enjoys strong support from Black and Hispanic communities, strongly opposed it.

President Biden held a press conference at the White House shortly after, sharply criticizing the Supreme Court's decision. He said, "We cannot let this decision be the final word," adding, "The Supreme Court can make rulings, but it cannot change what America stands for." He also called it "not a normal court."

Biden stated, "We believe our universities are stronger when they are racially diverse," and argued, "We need a new path forward." He emphasized the need for measures that secure educational diversity, including race, without violating the ruling. He urged universities, "Do not abandon your commitment to ensuring students from diverse backgrounds and experiences." He also proposed "new admission criteria" that consider the adversities students have overcome when selecting among qualified applicants.

President Biden also said he instructed the Department of Education to analyze policies that help expand inclusiveness and diversity among university members and those that hinder it. He cited the 'legacy' system, which favors children of alumni, as a policy that obstructs diversity. He also urged companies not to misuse the Supreme Court's decision in their hiring processes. The Departments of Education and Justice plan to provide guidance to universities within 45 days on legal college admission policies and practices following this ruling.

On the other hand, former President Trump, a Republican, welcomed the decision. On his social media platform Truth Social, he stated, "We are completely returning to a merit-based system," calling it "the right path." House Speaker Kevin McCarthy also welcomed the ruling, saying, "Now students will compete on equal standards and individual achievements."

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.