The Patriot Post® · A Tale of Two Universities

Back in June, the Supreme Court issued a ruling in two important cases: Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard and SFFA v. University of North Carolina. The combined cases dealt with the discriminatory practice of affirmative action in favor of black students at the expense of white and Asian students in college admissions.

In a 6-3 ruling, the Court struck down affirmative action, a pernicious form of racial discrimination plaguing the higher education system. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the majority opinion, with Justice Clarence Thomas writing a concurrence. The minority dissent was written by Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, and another by Justice Sonia Sotomayor.

Harvard University and the University of North Carolina were left to figure out what to do with their admissions processes, and their approaches couldn’t be more different.

Harvard, of course, decided to try to implement a loophole that was debated and discussed in the majority opinion and Sotomayor’s dissent. Harvard has now unveiled its updated 2024 essay prompts for student admissions, and the school seems bent on circumventing the Court’s ruling. The problematic question is this: “Harvard has long recognized the importance of enrolling a diverse student body. How will the life experiences that shape who you are today enable you to contribute to Harvard?”

It seems that Harvard elected to follow Sotomayor’s dissent to exploit a seeming loophole. However, Roberts addressed this in his majority opinion and even said: “Despite the dissent’s assertion to the contrary, universities may not simply establish through application essays or other means the regime we hold unlawful today. (A dissenting opinion is generally not the best source of legal advice on how to comply with the majority opinion.)”

An institution run and attended by many an elitist, Harvard is under the delusion that this subversion is “resistance” to a law it doesn’t like. How arrogant and racist of Harvard to decide which race is too successful and which needs a helping hand. Administrators want diversity for diversity’s sake, but the true diversity that brings about better higher education is diversity of thought, not of skin color. The two aren’t necessarily correlated, as is demonstrated in institutions like Harvard, which would prefer to have people of all the same political and philosophical leanings attend the university. That is part of the reason it is entrenched in its own racist rut.

UNC, however, opted for a different approach. UNC Chapel Hill — the leader of all the other branches of the UNC family — has unequivocally decided to eliminate discrimination from its admissions and hiring process. The new resolution is as follows: “shall not unlawfully discriminate against, or grant preferential treatment to, any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin, religion, sexual orientation, gender identity, age, disability, genetic information, or veteran status in its admissions, hiring and contracting.”

UNC Chancellor Kevin Guskiewicz stated at a recent board meeting, “I’m confident that we’re taking all the necessary steps to fully comply.” It’s not only the legal thing to do, but the ethical one as well.

This tale of two universities and the way they chose to handle anti-discriminatory admissions and hiring is going to be a testament to the resolve of the new SCOTUS ruling. Will Harvard be sued again for attempting to get around SCOTUS?

Time will tell.