The Philadelphia Bar Association issued the following statements upon release of the U.S. Supreme Court’s opinion in Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College. The opinion holds that race cannot be a factor when determining college admissions.
“The Supreme Court’s decision today not only devalues decades of legal precedent in support of affirmative action, but also ignores the stark racial inequalities and discrimination that persist in all aspects of life in the United States,” Chancellor Marc J. Zucker said. “The ruling gives short shrift to the systemic barriers that for centuries have inhibited the success of people of color. This is why our Association has long supported the doctrine of affirmative action, and our Board of Governors has passed numerous resolutions, dating back to at least 1986, in support of affirmative action programs. The Supreme Court’s ruling today threatens to harm the legal profession, as affirmative action is a key tool in creating a diverse pipeline of law students entering the field.”
Zucker observed, “This case did not involve quotas, although affirmative action often has been misunderstood as such. Likewise, the case is not about whether schools must be required to consider race in their admissions process. It’s about whether a school may be permitted to consider race as one of many factors in that process.”
“Affirmative action policies ensure that there will be a good faith effort by educational institutions to admit student populations that truly reflect the makeup of our country,” said Associate Director of the Office of Diversity Tara D. Phoenix. “Affirmative action allows members of historically marginalized groups to gain entrance to colleges, and subsequently careers – including the legal field – that were once completely unattainable due to institutionalized racism. With this ruling, the Court is dismantling one of the most important tools we have to ensure equality of opportunity.”
“Moreover, this ruling, like last year’s ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization contravenes the principle of stare decisis, or adherence to precedent, and like that ruling, undermines public confidence in the judiciary,” Zucker said. “There is longstanding precedent for the Court ruling in favor of affirmative action programs in admission, including in Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin and Grutter v. Bollinger.”
Zucker continued: “‘As Justice Sotomayor wrote in her dissent, ‘The devastating impact of this decision cannot be overstated. The majority’s vision of race neutrality will entrench racial segregation in higher education because racial inequality will persist so long as it is ignored.’”
“Our commitment to diversity is as strong today as it was yesterday and our Association will continue to take action to increase diversity within the bench and bar,” Diversity Chair Danielle Banks said. “As always, we will respect the rule of law, but we will continue to take affirmative steps to do what we know is right.”
