Source/Disclosures
Disclosures:
Healio could not confirm Gostin’s relevant financial disclosures at the time of publication.
ADD TOPIC TO EMAIL ALERTS
Receive an email when new articles are posted on
Please provide your email address to receive an email when new articles are posted on . ” data-action=”subscribe”> Subscribe
We were unable to process your request. Please try again later. If you continue to have this issue please contact [email protected].
Back to Healio
Key takeaways:
- The court majority claimed the admissions programs violated a clause in the Fourteenth Amendment.
- HHS said the decision weakens efforts to improve access to higher education among underrepresented groups.
The US Supreme Court ruled against the use of affirmative action programs during admissions processes at colleges and universities, potentially reducing the number of underrepresented students in medical education, experts said.
The plaintiff, Students for Fair Admissions, had filed separate lawsuits against Harvard University and the University of North Carolina, arguing that the universities violated the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, which prohibits discrimination of race, gender or ethnicity in programs receiving federal financial assistance.
The court majority claimed the admissions programs violated a clause in the Fourteenth Amendment. Image: Adobe Stock.
An AMA press release previously reported that Students for Fair Admissions said that the colleges’ admissions policies “unfairly discriminate against white and Asian applicants for the sake of a more diverse and inclusive study body.”
Overall, the Supreme Court agreed with the plaintiff, ruling 6-3 in the Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. University of North Carolina, et al. case and 6-2 in the Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College case. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson recuses herself from the Harvard case because she served on the university’s board of overseers, according to reporting by Reuters.
Chief Justice John Roberts Jr wrote in the opinion that the admissions programs lacked “sufficiently focused and measurable objectives warranting the use of race,” while employing race in a negative manner and racial stereotyping.
In a dissenting opinion, Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote that the court’s decision “stands in the way and rolls back decades of precedent and momentous progress.”
“The Court cements a superficial rule of colorblindness as a constitutional principle in an endemically segregated society where race has always mattered and continues to matter,” she wrote. “The Court subverts the constitutional guarantee of equal protection by further entrenching racial inequality in education, the very foundation of our democratic government and pluralistic society. Because the Court’s opinion is not grounded in law or fact and contravenes the vision of equality embodied in the Fourteenth Amendment, I dissent.”
speaking to healio, Lawrence O Gostin, JD, Founding Linda D. & Timothy J. O’Neill Professor of Global Health Law and director of the O’Neill Institute for National and Global Health at Georgetown University, said “the Supreme Court has abandoned decades of precedent, just as it did with Dobbs on abortion rights,” and “underrepresented students, and in other sectors, will have compounding disadvantages due to the Supreme Court’s actions.”
“The Court assumes that African Americans now have an equal playing field, so they no longer need affirmative action. But nothing could be further from the truth,” he said. “On virtually every measure, including income, education and health status, Blacks have worse outcomes than whites. While these cases involved higher education, they could have profound consequences for medical and public health programs designed to achieve equity, such as the allocation of scarce resources such as vaccines. We saw the unequal outcomes from COVID-19, and many states decided to use race among many factors to give preference in access to vaccines early in the pandemic.”
In a statement, HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra said the decision weakens efforts to make higher education accessible to underrepresented groups. According to the Association of American Medical Colleges, the number of Black and Hispanic first-year students entering medical schools in 2021 rose by 21% and 7.1% from the prior year, respectively. Despite this progress, Becerra said “there is still a significant deficit in the number of Black and Latino doctors and medical students.” As Healio previously reported, several states already banned affirmative action admissions policies and are now experiencing decreases in college enrollment and completion of STEM degrees among underrepresented groups.
“This ruling will make it even more difficult for the nation’s colleges and universities to help create future health experts and workers that reflect the diversity of our great nation. The health and well-being of Americans will suffer as a result,” Becerra said.
The ACP also released a statement opposing the ruling. ACP President Omar T. Atiq, MD, FACP, said that diversity within medical and education settings has shown to improve learning outcomes “by increasing active thinking and intellectual engagement skills and increases understanding of and empathy for diverse cultures.”
“Medical schools and other institutions of higher education should consider a person’s race and ethnicity, alongside other factors that are often considered like socioeconomic status and geographic location, as part of evaluating applicants to counter both past and current discrimination,” Atiq said.
He added that ACP will continue to support policies “that can help to increase diversity and promote equity.”
References:
- Internal medicine physicians disappointed by court decision against affirmative action in admissions. https://www.acponline.org/acp-newsroom/internal-medicine-physicians-disappointed-by-court-decision-against-affirmative-action-in-admissions. Published June 29, 2023. Accessed June 29, 2023.
- Medical school enrollment more diverse in 2021. https://www.aamc.org/news/press-releases/medical-school-enrollment-more-diverse-2021. Published Dec. 8, 2021. Accessed June 29, 2023.
- Recognizing diversity’s benefits in classrooms — and exam rooms. https://www.ama-assn.org/about/leadership/recognizing-diversity-s-benefits-classrooms-and-exam-rooms. Published Oct. 31. 2022. Accessed June 29, 2023.
- Statement from HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra on the Supreme Court’s Harvard, University of North Carolina Affirmative Action Decision. https://www.hhs.gov/about/news/2023/06/29/statement-from-hhs-secretary-xavier-becerra-on-the-supreme-courts-harvard-university-of-north-carolina- affirmative-action-decision.html. Published June 29, 2023. Accessed June 29, 2023.
- Students For Fair Admissions, Inc. v. Presidents and Fellows of Harvard College. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/20-1199_hgdj.pdf. Accessed June 29, 2023.
- Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. https://www.justice.gov/crt/fcs/TitleVI. Accessed June 29, 2023.
- US Supreme Court pick Jackson to recuse from Harvard race case. https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/us-supreme-court-pick-jackson-recuse-harvard-race-case-2022-03-23/. June 29, 2023.
ADD TOPIC TO EMAIL ALERTS
Receive an email when new articles are posted on
Please provide your email address to receive an email when new articles are posted on . ” data-action=”subscribe”> Subscribe
We were unable to process your request. Please try again later. If you continue to have this issue please contact [email protected].
Back to Healio
