The very conservative United States Supreme Court on Thursday ended affirmative action programs at universities, a new historic U-turn a year after its reversal on abortion.
Its six conservative magistrates judged, against the opinion of the three progressives, contrary to the Constitution, the admission procedures on campuses taking into account the color of the skin or the ethnic origin of the candidates.
Many universities “have wrongly considered that the basis of a person’s identity is not their probation, the skills acquired or the lessons learned, but the color of their skin. Our constitutional history does not condone that,” Magistrate John Roberts wrote on behalf of the majority.
“In other words, the student should be treated on the basis of their individual experiences, but not on racial criteria,” he adds.
After the civil rights movement of the 1960s, several highly selective universities had introduced racial and ethnic criteria into their admissions process, in order to correct the inequalities stemming from the segregationist past of the United States.
These policies, known as “positive discrimination”, have made it possible to increase the share of black, Hispanic and Amerindian students, but have always been highly criticized in conservative circles, who consider them opaque and see them as “reverse racism”.
Referred to on several occasions since 1978, the Supreme Court had prohibited quotas, but had always authorized universities to take into account, among other things, racial criteria. Until now, she considered “legitimate” the search for greater diversity on campuses, even if it means violating the principle of equality between all American citizens.
Thursday, she made a U-turn, as she had done on June 24, 2022 by canceling the federal right to abortion which she had guaranteed since 1973.
His about-face sparked a chorus of applause on the right. “It’s a great day for America”, “we’re going back to a merit system”, wrote on Truth Social the former Republican President Donald Trump, architect of this reversal since he profoundly overhauled the Court during its mandate.
Conversely, Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer denounced an “ill-advised decision” that “puts a gigantic obstacle in the way of more racial justice”.
More measured, Barack Obama, the first black president of the United States, underlined that “positive discrimination had never been a complete response to the need to build a more just society”. But she “gave us a chance to show that we deserve more than a seat at the table,” he added on Twitter.
The strongest criticisms were raised within the Court itself, whose three progressive judges put in writing their deep disagreement with their colleagues.
“Six unelected members of the majority overturned the status quo based on their political preference,” Sonia Sotomayor wrote on their behalf. They preferred to “put a colorless veneer on a society where the racial question matters and will continue to matter.”
Admittedly, the majority authorizes universities to take into account “the personal experiences” of candidates and the impact of their skin color on their career, but that amounts to putting “lipstick on a pig”, he said. she asserted.
This judgment finds its source in a complaint filed in 2014 against the oldest private and public universities in the United States, Harvard and that of North Carolina.
At the head of an association called “Students for fair admission”, a neoconservative activist, Edward Blum, had accused them of discriminating against Asian students. The latter, who have academic results clearly above the average, would be more numerous on campus if their performance were the only selection criterion, he argued.
After having suffered several defeats in court, he turned to the Supreme Court which, ironically, has never been as diverse as today with two African-American magistrates and a Hispanic.
The government of Democratic President Joe Biden had pleaded in vain for the status quo. “The future of our country depends on its ability to have leaders with varied profiles, capable of leading an increasingly diverse society,” said his representative.
The president must speak on the subject at 12:30 p.m.