AG
HEALEY LEADS MULTISTATE SUPREME COURT BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF RACE-CONSCIOUS
ADMISSIONS PROGRAMS IN HIGHER EDUCATION
Lawsuits
Challenge Use of Race in Admissions; Coalition Argues the Educational Benefits
of a Diverse Student Population Serve Critical State Interests
BOSTON — Massachusetts
Attorney General Maura Healey today led a coalition of 20 attorneys general in
filing a multistate amicus brief urging the Supreme Court to reject a request
to overturn more than four decades of precedent allowing higher education
institutions to consider race or ethnicity as part of holistic admissions
processes to promote diversity in learning environments.
The brief, filed in the cases Students For Fair Admissions,
Inc. v. President & Fellows of Harvard College and Students For Fair
Admissions, Inc v. University of North Carolina, urges the Court to reaffirm
its prior rulings in Grutter v. Bollinger, Gratz v. Bollinger, and Fisher v.
University of Texas at Austin that found that a holistic race-conscious
admissions policy is constitutional when necessary to achieve the compelling
governmental interest of conferring on students the educational benefits of
diversity. In the brief, the states contend that the ability to work and serve
diverse populations is critical to meeting the needs of their residents – in
delivering health care, in educating students, and leading and staffing
businesses and government institutions.
“Now, more than ever, it’s critical that our students –
future doctors and nurses, teachers, and business and community leaders – come
from all backgrounds and learn in a diverse educational environment,” AG Healey
said. “We are urging the Court to uphold four decades of precedent allowing our
educational institutions to foster diversity in our schools. Diversity of
thought, background and experience strengthens us as a society.”
According to the brief, the benefits of diversity in higher
education have become more and more critical to states when graduates join the
workforce, participate in civic life and take on leadership roles. The brief
describes how diversity in the healthcare workforce improves health outcomes
and access for all residents – particularly for those in medically underserved
communities. Additionally, increasing the diversity of primary school educators
improves the academic performance of public school students and college
attendance rates. The states also argue that the businesses that fuel their
economies rely on a diverse pipeline of graduates who have the potential to
bring differing perspectives to leadership positions in their fields.
The brief highlights disparities that reversing this
precedent will exacerbate. For example, while Black Americans make up nearly 13
percent of the country’s population, as recently as 2018, only 5.4 percent of
physicians are Black, and, according to the brief, prohibiting medical schools
from implementing a race-conscious admissions program could worsen these
disparities. In fact, the brief points out that medical schools in states that
have bans on race-conscious admissions programs have seen a 37 percent decrease
in enrollment from historically underrepresented communities.
The brief also describes how, nationally, nearly 80 percent
of educators are white and non-Hispanic, but 54 percent of students in public
primary and secondary schools were students of color in 2020. In Massachusetts,
nearly 40 percent of primary and secondary students are students of color, and
just 10 percent of teachers are people of color. Given these disparities, the
growing diversity in our country, and the educational benefits of a diverse
teaching workforce, states need every option available to increase the
diversity of educators. Removing the possibility of using holistic
race-conscious admissions where necessary will be detrimental to future
generations of students.
The states further argue in their brief that their
democratic and civic institutions gain strength and legitimacy when graduates
bring diverse backgrounds and experiences to leadership positions across our
country. “We need to cultivate diverse leaders from and for every corner of our
states, to serve in positions of leadership in our governments – whether as
legislators, judges, mayors, city councilors, sheriffs, or any of the other
elected and non-elected officials who together govern our communities.”
Finally, the states describe how achieving meaningful
student-body diversity while altogether excluding any consideration of race has
proven challenging in states with bans on race-conscious admissions,
particularly at selective institutions that produce so many of the states’
civic, professional, and business leaders. Accordingly, the states argue,
institutions of higher education continue to require the flexibility, where
necessary, to use the kind of holistic race-conscious admissions policies that
the Supreme Court has approved for decades.
Today’s brief was handled by State Solicitor Bessie Dewar
and Assistant Attorneys General Ann Lynch and David Ureña of the Massachusetts
Attorney General’s Office and joined by the attorneys general of California,
Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Illinois,
Maine, Maryland, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, New Jersey, New York, Oregon,
Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Washington, and Wisconsin.
