UNC-Chapel Hill affirmative action case heads to U.S. Supreme Court | Beaufort County Now | The U.S. Supreme Court is poised to make what could be a landmark ruling on the constitutionality of affirmative action after justices decided Monday, Jan. 24, to take up cases arising from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and Harvard University.

Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)
    Publisher's Note: This post appears here courtesy of the Carolina Journal. The author of this post is David Bass.

(CJ photo by Maya Reagan)


    The U.S. Supreme Court is poised to make what could be a landmark ruling on the constitutionality of affirmative action after justices decided Monday, Jan. 24, to take up cases arising from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and Harvard University.

    The cases originated in 2014 when the nonprofit Students for Fair Admissions sued UNC-Chapel Hill and Harvard for unfairly discriminating against white and Asian students in their admissions process, giving preference to black and Latino students instead. The cases proceeded in two different sets of federal courts.

    A federal judge ruled in November 2021 that UNC-Chapel Hill did not violate federal law and that the school could continue using race as a factor in admissions. That decision was appealed to the nation's top court. Supporters sought to have the case combined with the Harvard case, which had proceeded further through the federal court system.

    "We are grateful the Supreme Court accepted these important cases for review," said Edward Blum, president of Students for Fair Admissions, in a statement. "It is our hope that the justices will end the use of race as an admissions factor at Harvard, UNC, and all colleges and universities."

    Harvard is the oldest private university in the United States, while UNC-Chapel Hill is the oldest public university. Arguments in the case at the U.S. Supreme Court are likely to take place in the fall, with a ruling coming next year.

    The new conservative majority on the nation's top court means that justices could ostensibly overturn affirmative action and ban racial preferences in admissions decisions.

    "I'm delighted the court has decided to hear this case," said Jon Guze, senior fellow in legal studies at the John Locke Foundation. "Like other universities, UNC and Harvard have been systematically discriminating against applicants on the basis of race for years. That's clearly illegal. It's also immoral, and it's counterproductive because it harms the specific racial groups it's supposed to help. In the past, the Supreme Court has allowed the universities to use 'diversity' as a pretext for flaunting the letter of the law. Now, I'm hoping it finally put a stop to this obnoxious practice."

    "I think this is the beginning of the end of the 'woke' movement," said Kenny Xu, president of the nonprofit Color Us United that advocates for a race-blind America. "The movement is premised off of the allegations that America is a racist country. Because of that, we need to have policies like race preferences to give unmerited treatment to people of certain races - obviously meaning you need to exclude higher-qualified people of nonpreferred races."

    According to the UNC-Chapel Hill website, the university evaluates "each student individually based on a multitude of factors, including but not limited to, academic performance, test scores, class rank, essays, experiences, circumstances, and potential to contribute to the educational environment. We only consider race or ethnicity as one of these many factors if a student chooses to share that information. Even then, we consider race or ethnicity in a limited way, as one factor among many, in assessing everything we know about an applicant."

    According to Ballotpedia, seven out of 16 schools in the UNC System make admissions decisions based in part on race. Nine states in the United States have banned affirmative action in college admissions decisions, including deep-blue states like California and Washington. Last year, California voters upheld their anti-affirmative action law by a 57% margin.
Go Back

HbAD0

Latest Op-Ed & Politics

Following the failed vote on pro-abortion legislation proposed by Democrats, Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio Cortez has issued a statement that democracy has failed and that our nation may never recover.
Several employees who worked at the Mayfield, Kentucky, candle factor that was destroyed by Friday night’s tornadoes said they were told they would be fired if they left their shifts early.
Super-model Gisele Bündchen, wife of NFL legend Tom Brady, revealed how she was traumatized at the age of 18 when she was made to wear a breast-baring outfit at a fashion show.
The Monkeypox pandemic has finally breached the shores of the United States, with the CDC confirming a staggering 1 infections so far.
The Department of Justice (DOJ) Office of the Inspector General (OIG) said in a report on Tuesday that numerous FBI officials had sex with prostitutes while overseas and that most of them lied to investigators when confronted about the allegations.

HbAD1

62% say they would take up arms to fight while 12% said they would not
fewer deaths per 100,000 than most of Europe
The North Carolina General Assembly convened the 2022 short session Wednesday, May 18 after the longest long session in state history concluded in March.
A small clique is trying to control the local GOP and circumvent the duly elected Executive Committee
Fox News host Tucker Carlson fired back at Democratic Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY), calling him a “coward” after Schumer refused to appear on Carlson’s show to discuss Schumer linking Carlson to the Buffalo massacre in which 10 people were killed.

HbAD2

Sporting a purple pin-striped suit and top hat while twirling a cane whimsically, President Biden announced today that he has hidden five golden crack pipes among the millions of taxpayer-funded safe smoking kits.

HbAD3

 
Back to Top