Supreme Court avoids conflict over contentious diversity policy at one of the best high schools in the country
In dissent, Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas stated that they would have reversed the ruling of a lower court that supported the program.
Joining Alito in dissent was Thomas. “What the Fourth Circuit majority held, in essence, is that intentional racial discrimination is constitutional so long as it is not too severe,” wrote Alito. “This reasoning is indefensible, and it cries out for correction.”
The ruling was made months after Harvard University and the University of North Carolina were forced to stop using affirmative action by the Supreme Court. In response to that decision, numerous colleges, universities, and companies have been rushing to examine their diversity policies and make sure they can stand up to the court’s scrutiny.
In light of George Floyd’s 2020 murder, the Fairfax County School Board in Virginia modified its admissions procedure at Thomas Jefferson High School for Science & Technology, which is frequently named among the top high schools in the country but has a relatively small minority of black and Hispanic students.
The school was mandated by the new policy to admit 1.5% of the eighth grade class at every middle school in the district. Despite having the effect of increasing the number of black students, the plaintiffs in this action claimed that it “had a substantial adverse impact on Asian American students in order to achieve its desired racial balance.”
In 2021, a group of parents filed a lawsuit, claiming the program went against the 14th Amendment’s guarantee of equal treatment under the law for those in comparable circumstances.
The school board retorted that the policy was racially neutral because it did not establish any racial targets and admissions officers were unaware of the color of applicants. Stated differently, the policy is grounded in geography rather than race. However, guaranteeing admission to Thomas Jefferson for a portion of the graduating class of certain of the district’s middle schools, which are primarily attended by minority kids, increased the diversity of that school.
Judge Claude Hilton of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia declared in February that the new admissions policy’s foundation was unlawful “racial balancing” and that it was against the 14th Amendment. However, that ruling was overturned by a three judge panel of the Richmond-based U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit.
The appeals court stated that it was “satisfied that the boardโs adoption of the challenged admissions policy fully comports with the Fourteenth Amendmentโs demand of equal protection under the law.” The court determined that this regulation has “no racially disparate impact on Asian American students.”
According to Alito, the court came to that ruling because Asian Americans continue to be overrepresented. “That is a clearly mistaken understanding of what it means for a law or policy to have a disparate effect on the members of a particular racial or ethnic group,” he stated. The Supreme Court upholds the decision made by the 4th Circuit by refusing to hear the appeal.
The Thomas Jefferson case has already been examined by the Supreme Court, albeit in a different phase. While the lawsuit was pending in lower courts, the plaintiffs urged the justices to temporarily overturn the school’s policy. That plea was denied by the court last year without a reason for its decision. There are three judges who lean conservative. Neil Gorsuch, Thomas, and Alito all declared that they would have obstructed the policy.
Admittedly, under the new approach, the current class of freshmen at the school has a notably different racial makeup than previous classes. Court records show that the percentage of black students rose from 1% to 7% of the student body. The percentage of Hispanic voters rose from 3% to 11%. The percentage of Asian Americans fell from 73% to 54%.