When engaging with stakeholders, consider emphasizing the following points:
- Although most media coverage reflects predictions that “affirmative action is dead,” we cannot predict precise court outcomes. And, importantly, SFFA conceded in its briefs and in oral arguments that it was not claiming that applicants should not be able to share their full life’s story and perspectives as part of the application process—including with respect to issues of their racial identity. That concession could prove pivotal in the court’s ultimate resolution of the case.
- Nothing in the record—or based on the precise arguments put forth by SFFA—should result in a court ruling that threatens the inherent integrity and value of mission-related institutional diversity, equity, and inclusion goals. Those issues are present in the pending cases only in the context of their role in justifying the consideration of race and/or ethnicity as factors in the admission processes of Harvard and UNC.
- Working with other national organizations, NACAC will issue guidance to the field in the weeks following the court’s rulings to address specific questions about the meaning and implications of the court’s decision—for higher education enrollment leaders and for school counselors.
For further background on the cases, view the Meeting the Moment webinar from March 7, 2023, or review resources on NACAC’s webpage about the U.S. Supreme Court and race-conscious admission.