Students Decry End of Affirmative Action

‘A GUT PUNCH.’ Harvard students lamented the Court’s decision, citing concerns that diversity at the school would suffer.

BY NATALIE K BANDURA AND ADELAIDE E. PARKER CRIMSON STAFF WRITERS

Harvard students wide - ly condemned the Supreme Court’s decision on Thursday to sharply restrict the consideration of race in college admissions, expressing fear and sadness that the ruling is likely to reduce racial diversity at the school. Harvard has defended its admissions process against a lawsuit from Students for Fair Admissions, an anti-affirmative action group, since 2014. Thursday’s ruling upended longstanding college admissions practices and is expected to change the makeup of future classes — reducing the number of Black, Lat- inx, and Native American students — at universities across the country.

“Even though we knew based on the conservative makeup of the [court] that this is probably how it was gonna go, I think it was absolutely shocking because it goes against 45 years of established precedent on affirmative action,” Muskaan Arshad ’25 said. “It was absolutely shocking, devastating, a gut punch.”

Affirmative action policies in higher education, long a contentious issue in the United States, are viewed unfavorably among Americans broadly. Ahead of the Court’s decision, a Pew Research Center poll published June 8 found that 50 percent of U.S. adults disapprove of the practice while 33 percent approve of it.

Among Harvard students, however, affirmative action policies are immensely popular. The Crimson’s Class of 2023 Senior Survey found that 63 percent of respondents in the graduating class supported affirmative ac-

Biden Administration,

BY SAMUEL P. GOLDSTON AND YUSUF S. MIAN CRIMSON STAFF WRITERS

The Biden administration, Massachusetts state officials, and local Cambridge leaders have condemned the Supreme Court’s decision to effectively ban affirmative action in higher education admissions.

In a 6-2 decision, the Court held that Harvard’s race-conscious admissions policies are unconstitutional as the culmination of a yearslong lawsuit by anti-affirmative action group Students for Fair Admissions. The Court also ruled against the University of North Carolina’s admissions policies in a 6-3 decision.

In a Thursday address from the White House, President Joe Biden criticized the Court’s decision and argued for the importance of diversity on college campuses.

“I strongly, strongly disagree with the Court’s decision,” Biden said. “I’ve always believed that one of the greatest strengths of America — you’re tired of hearing me say it — is our diversity,” he said. “I believe our colleges are stronger when they are racially diverse.”

Biden announced during the speech that he is directing the Department of Education to scrutinize practices that “expand privilege instead of opportunity,” including legacy admissions.

In a Thursday press release, U.S. Secretary of Education Miguel A. Cardona called on leaders in higher education to continue their “commitment” to diversity.

“Your leadership and commitment to ensuring our educational institutions reflect the vast and rich diversity of our people are needed now more than ever,” he wrote.

In response to a question from a reporter, Biden took aim at the nation’s highest court. “This is not a normal court,” he said.

Republican leaders, however, broadly expressed support for the Court’s decision, including a wide swath of the GOP presidential primary field. In a post to Truth Social, former President Donald Trump wrote that the decision marked “a great day for America.” tion, while just 15 percent opposed it.

“Our greatest minds must be cherished and that’s what this wonderful day has brought. We’re going back to all merit-based— and that’s the way it should be!” the 2024 GOP frontrunner wrote.

SFFA has long argued the elimination of affirmative action would make college admissions more equitable. But in interviews following SFFA’s victory Thursday, Harvard students said they believe the ruling will do the opposite.

“Considering race doesn’t make the system unfair — it corrects for the historic and present conditions which often make it difficult for top universities to recognize and admit racially diverse talent, while simultaneously increasing inclusion and diversity in higher education,” incoming freshman Justin Black ’27 wrote in an emailed statement. “I believe not considering race as one of many factors makes the system unfair.”

“This case isn’t really just about getting into Harvard. It’s about building a more equitable and fair and diverse future and unfortunately, that was ruled against,” Rebecca S. Zhang ’26 said in an interview.

Black said a race-blind approach to admissions would ignore Harvard’s long history of being a white-only institution, as well as the lasting impacts of systemic racial discrimination, which “resulted in worse socioeconomic conditions for students of color, impacting the strength of their application.”

Leah Yeshitila ’26 said she feels “sad” to see what she feels is a “misuse of the equal protection clause from the Brown v. Board of Education case” to overturn affirmative action.

“Race neutral is the new separate but equal, because it lacks so much support in recent historical context,” Yeshitila said. “It allows for the various racial inequities that already exist to continue existing, and that is racism. Not addressing racism is racism.”

Reflecting on her Asian American heritage, Isabella Q. Cao ’26 said she finds it “disheartening” to see Asian Americans pitted against other minority groups as the victims of affirmative action.

“Lumping all Asians together and saying that Asians are all academically successful, or that there’s this model minority, I feel like, first of all, it’s very dismissive towards the struggles that some Asian communities have faced,” Cao said.

Students also lamented the damaging effects of a potential drop in racial diversity in higher education institutions.

Having grown up in a predominantly white community in Arkansas, Arshad said she fears the decision will “completely change the makeup of our university” by restricting the diversity that has had a positive impact on her college experience.

“I would wear lighter foundations and hide my culture and not even talk to other brown people,” Arshad said, referring to her hometown in Arkansas. “Because this is such a homogenous white space, I was like I need to fit in, I need to forget about my identity.”

“Coming over to such a diverse environment, I was allowed to be myself, I can really change the way I viewed myself, how I viewed my culture, my identity as an Asian American brown woman,“ she added. “It completely changed my life.”

Nuriel R. Vera-DeGraff ’26 highlighted the likely impact the ruling will have on the racial makeup of the professional workforce, as graduate schools “will suffer a lot in terms of their diversity.”

“Having less breadth in Black and brown lawyers and judges will make it much harder to progress towards racial equity on the legal side,” Vera-DeGraff said. “On the healthcare side, I think having less black and brown doctors and nurses will exacerbate the already horrible inequities.” natalie.bandura@thecrimson.com adelaide.parker@thecrimson.com