소수인종 우대정책과 미국 대학 입시제도의 변화-Students for Fair Admission v. Harvard

The U.S. Supreme Court, in Students for Fair Admissions (SFFA) v. Harvard, ruled that the affirmative action policies based on race at Harvard University and the University of North Carolina are unconstitutional and prohibited the use of race-based admissions policies in the future. To pass strict scrutiny, the universities must demonstrate that using affirmative action policies for racial minorities is necessary to achieve a “compelling interest,” and that these policies are “narrowly tailored” to satisfy that compelling interest. The Supreme Court has previously recognized achieving educational diversity through racial diversity among the student body as a compelling government interest. However, the majority opinion in SFFA v. Harvard stated that achieving educational diversity through racial diversity cannot be a compelling interest. The reason is that it is unclear as to how the schools can achieve the educational diversity they seek by assigning specific minority students to particular racial categories and making admission decisions based on that. That is, their classification of races is unclear and ambiguous, and the connection between racial diversity and educational diversity is unclear. Additionally, the majority opinion stated that their affirmative action programs are not narrowly tailored, as educational diversity can also be achieved through race-neutral alternatives. The key reason for the majority opinion deeming the university’s affirmative action policy unconstitutional lies with the problems in the university’s “holistic review” process and the use of the “plus factor” system. It favored non-Asian minority applicants while placing Asian-American applicants at a disadvantage. As a result of the Supreme Court's ruling, legal challenges are expected for two other admission systems. The first is legacy admissions, a special admissions program mostly benefiting white applicants whose family members or relatives are alumni of the university. The second is donor-preference admissions, a system that favors the children of significant donors, mostly benefiting white applicants as well. With the affirmative action policies being deemed unconstitutional, universities are expected to supplement it with various race-neutral alternatives in the future. Specifically, university admission systems are likely to expand socioeconomic preference programs and are anticipated to broaden programs that do not consider an applicant’s financial aid application (Need-blind Policy) and that give preference to applicants who would be the first in their family to attend college.