the future of higher education in our country could be
forever changed as the Supreme Court prepares to take
up two cases involving the always hot button topic of
affirmative action, the justice are being asked to
strike down affirmative action lawsuit which accused
Harvard and University of North Carolina of
discriminatory admission policies. Newsy national
correspondent Haley bolas live outside the Supreme
Court with more on these cases and of course the
potential impact on higher education as a whole. Hey
Hailey, good morning, Hey, good morning. These cases on
affirmative action have the potential to impact decades
of precedent and admission processes and college
across the country. Now a little background, the court
has previously allowed schools to consider race among a
number of factors to advance the educational benefit
of having a more diverse student body in a nearly
tailored way. Now today, the court is going to hear two
different challenges to differ cases, both brought by a
conservative activists led group students for fair
admissions. Now it's against the nation's oldest
private and public universities, Harvard and the
University of North Carolina. Now, those organizati
has been unsuccessful in the lower courts, but today
will make their argument in front of a court that has
seen three new justices appointed under trump and that
recently overturned Roe v wade and the Dobbs decision,
which is something the petitioners have pointed to in
these cases. The cases asked specifically if the court
should overturn a case called, it goes back to 2003, it
is a case that upheld the University of michig
consideration of race and a narrowly tailored way again,
as we mentioned for the use of educational benefits and
having a diverse student body. Now, in the case
involving U.N.C. The cases brought under the equal
protection clause of the 14th Amendment. Now the
organization argues that the policies disadvantage
white and asian american students, one question
specific to this case is on race neutral alternatives
The organization says U.N.C. Has them and that explicit
racial preferences are not constitutional. Meanwhile,
Says it needs race, conscientious admissions to ach
diversity, pointing back to its hist of excluding black
students and the impact that continues to have today on
diversity. It notes that race there was only one of
more than 40 factors considered When we look at the
case specifically against Harvard, it's brought under
Title six of the Civil Rights Act. Now the organizatio
here argues discrimination specifically against asian
american students. Now the court will consider if
Harvard has violated the Civil Rights Act through
allege racial balancing and overemphasizing race.
Harvard says it looks at many factors under someone's
individual uniqueness and that race only benefits
students who are otherwise already highly qualif
The school also says that it has looked at alternatives
and has not found one that would achieve the same
educational benefits. Listen to what one legal expert
we spoke with had to say when explaining how this
breaks down. So the way universities defend using r
is they say we need diverse student bodies, you kno
having different perspectives, different voices,
different experiences. Come to bear in the classroom
and on campus. That's good for everyone. You know, if
you're a college student, it's good for you to be
exposed to people from different backgrounds and we
need to use race to have diversity in our student b
So that is the actual justification that both Harvard
And every other university is using. Now. There are
already nine states that began affirmative action
through ballot initiatives that includes in California
where the university of Califor has weighed in and a
breach of the court saying that despite their effor
to look at other approaches to promote diversity
the school still struggles to enroll what they call a
sufficiently diverse student body. The college board
also wrote in and supporting the schools, saying
the petitioner's request would put the admissions
process across the country into upheaval. The biden
administration, also supporting the schools here in
this case. Now, initially, interestingly both of these
cases were consolidated but then later are separated
back out. And one thing to note is Justice K. Tangie
Brown Jackson previously served on the Harvard board of
overseers and is a graduate of that school. So has
stepped back from that case. We expect arguments here
to get underway around 10 a.m. But not a decision until
the court terms end. So you're looking at a later in
the spring rob. Alright, Haley bull reporting live from
the Supreme Court. Another momentous decision um in the
works here. Getting started today, Haley, thanks so
much.