Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College

Facts

Harvard and UNC both employ highly selective admissions processes. At Harvard, applications are initially screened by a “first reader” who assigns numerical scores in six categories, including an “overall” rating that can consider an applicant’s race. Regional subcommittees then review applications and may consider race, followed by a full committee review where the racial composition of the applicant pool is discussed. The final stage, called the “lop,” involves cutting some tentatively admitted students, with race being one of only four pieces of information available during this process.

UNC’s process is similar, with applications first reviewed by an admissions office reader who assigns numerical ratings and may consider race as a factor. Readers may provide an applicant a “plus” based on race, and a committee of experienced staff members then conducts a “school group review” of every initial decision, potentially also considering race.

Both institutions claimed their consideration of race was part of a holistic review process aimed at achieving the educational benefits of diversity. However, SFFA argued these programs amounted to racial discrimination that violated the Equal Protection Clause and Title VI.