In a significant decision, the United States Supreme Court ruled to impose substantial restrictions on considering race in admissions for Harvard University and University of North Carolina, effectively overturning affirmative action in a 6-2 decision. The ruling was outlined in a 40-page opinion authored by Chief Justice Justice Roberts.

The Supreme Court found that both Harvard and University of North Carolina's admission policies violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. This clause ensures that all U.S. citizens receive "equal protection under the law," and their "privileges or immunities" cannot be deprived without due process of law. Justice Roberts wrote that while the goals of the admission policies at Harvard and University of North Carolina were "laudable," including exposing students to diverse perspectives and cultivating future leadership, these goals were not sufficiently clear for strict scrutiny.

Despite finding the admission policies at Harvard and University of North Carolina violated the Equal Protection Clause, the Supreme Court's ruling leaves room for targeted use of race in university admissions. For instance, universities can consider applicants discussing how race has impacted their lives. However, this approach must be specifically relevant to qualities or unique abilities that applicants can bring to the university.

In the ruling, the Supreme Court acknowledged the perspective of Solicitor General Elizabeth B. Prelogar that affirmative action in military academies is crucial for national security, but noted that the policies of these schools weren't under scrutiny in this case. Harvard Law School Professor Gersen believes that this exclusion of military academies might, in fact, set the stage for litigation, particularly regarding military academies and affirmative action, which could be anticipated in the future.

In 2003, the Supreme Court made a landmark decision in Grutter v. Bollinger that upheld the use of affirmative action in college admissions. "Students for Fair Admissions" sought to overturn this decision in their lawsuits against Harvard and University of North Carolina.

In 2014, "Students for Fair Admissions" initiated lawsuits against Harvard and University of North Carolina for the first time.

This ruling might lead universities to seek new strategies to ensure diversity in their student bodies, such as considering factors like geographic location and socioeconomic status. However, the association of these factors with race could potentially lead to new litigation. Harvard Law School Professor Jeannie Suk Gersen suggests that this will make it more difficult for plaintiffs to prove that universities used race as a proxy factor in admission processes in future lawsuits.

Chief Justice Justice Roberts criticized the way universities consider race in admissions in the conclusion of his opinion. He wrote that universities erroneously focus on an individual's skin color rather than the challenges they've overcome, the skills they've built, or the courses they've learned when evaluating someone's identity. He further added that our constitutional history cannot tolerate choices that primarily evaluate based on skin color.

Break the border and stand out on the international stage.