More on the Harvard/North Carolina Affirmative Action Cases

From the LA Times: The Supreme Court on Friday took a step that will allow new Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, the first Black woman on the court, to take part in a case that could lead to the end of the use of race in college admissions. Jackson, who joined the court June 30 after the retirement of Justice Stephen G. Breyer, had pledged during her confirmation hearing to sit out the case involving Harvard’s admissions policy because she was a member of the school’s board.

The Harvard dispute had been joined to a similar lawsuit involving the University of North Carolina. The court split the case in two, allowing Jackson to hear arguments and vote in the North Carolina case. She will not participate in the Harvard case. Harvard is a private institution, while North Carolina is a public university. Jackson’s participation in the North Carolina case seems unlikely to make a difference in the outcome on a court with a 6-3 conservative majority that is skeptical of the role of race in education, voting and other areas...

Jackson was a member of Harvard’s Board of Overseers from 2016 until the spring. It is made up of alumni and is one of Harvard’s two governing bodies. She is a graduate both of Harvard College and Harvard Law School. Three other justices also got their law degrees from Harvard: Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justices Elena Kagan and Neil M. Gorsuch. Roberts also was a Harvard undergraduate and Kagan was the law school dean for a time...

Full story at https://www.latimes.com/world-nation/story/2022-07-22/supreme-court-move-allows-jackson-to-take-part-in-race-case.

===

Since the two cases are now separated, and since the North Carolina case involves a public institution similar to UC, it is possible that the difference in composition of the justices in the two cases could result in separate outcomes, despite the skepticism expressed in the article above. As we have noted before, UC might well argue that since it complies with Prop 209 (anti-affirmative action initiative), whatever decision emerges from the cases would not affect its admission process. As we have also noted, if that outcome occurs, it will be ironic that the Regents unsuccessfully urged voters to repeal Prop 209 since it could become their future defense.