Ohio colleges, Charles F. Kettering Foundation react to affirmative action decision


                        Protesters for and against affirmative action demonstrate outside the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington, June 29, 2023. The Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that the race-conscious admissions programs at Harvard and the University of North Carolina were unlawful, curtailing affirmative action at colleges and universities around the nation, a policy that has long been a pillar of higher education. (Kenny Holston/The New York Times)

Protesters for and against affirmative action demonstrate outside the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington, June 29, 2023. The Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that the race-conscious admissions programs at Harvard and the University of North Carolina were unlawful, curtailing affirmative action at colleges and universities around the nation, a policy that has long been a pillar of higher education. (Kenny Holston/The New York Times)

The Supreme Court on Thursday struck down affirmative action in college admissions, declaring race cannot be a factor and forcing institutions of higher education to look for new ways to achieve diverse student bodies.

The court’s conservative majority effectively overturned cases reaching back 45 years in invalidating admissions plans at Harvard and the University of North Carolina, the nation’s oldest private and public colleges, respectively.

The decision, like last year’s momentous abortion ruling that overturned Roe v. Wade, marked the realization of a long-sought conservative legal goal, this time finding that race-conscious admissions plans violate the Constitution and a law that applies to colleges that receive federal funding, as almost all do.

Presidents of many colleges quickly issued statements affirming their commitment to diversity regardless of the court’s decision. Many said they were still assessing the impact but would follow federal law.

Miami University said in anticipation of the ruling, it had planned to “carefully analyze its potential impact on our community.”

“Miami University remains committed to inclusive excellence, and to recruiting a student body that is well-rounded, talented, and diverse across beliefs, lived experiences, culture, and race. Miami University fully embraces the philosophy and belief that a diverse academic community is among an institution’s greatest strengths. For admission determination, Miami has always considered a wide range of student attributes in the holistic review of each student’s application. These include curriculum strength, demographics, location, diversity broadly defined, strength of essay and recommendations, among dozens of others,” the university said in a statement.

“We will continue to do everything in our legal authority to close equity gaps and provide greater access to a Miami education.”

University of Dayton officials said they would review the Supreme Court ruling.

“The University intends to continue considering each applicant holistically and how the applicant might uniquely contribute to the University, using all permissible information,” officials said.

UD officials said the university will still provide scholarships and grant aid to talented, underserved students. Among incoming students in fall 2023, the university expects more than 18% will come from historically underrepresented racial and ethnic groups.

Xavier University said in statement: “As we understand today’s ruling from the Supreme Court, universities can no longer take race into consideration as an express factor in admissions. Xavier does not use race as a deciding factor when considering a prospective student’s application, and therefore, today’s Supreme Court opinion will not affect Xavier’s admission decision process. At Xavier, we are fortunate to have a diverse student body. Last year’s incoming student class included 24% multicultural students.

In advance of the decision Ohio State Provost Melissa Gilliam sent an email to students on June 20.

“Right now, we expect any changes to admissions to go into effect immediately and to be forward-looking, without impacting our current students’ place at the university,” they wrote. “Again, we will share more as we review the decisions – and remain committed to teaching, research, academic freedom, considerate discourse and support for each other as Buckeyes.”

Cathy Petersen, a spokeswoman for Sinclair Community College, said the ruling won’t apply to the community college because the college already accepts anyone who applies. Wright State University did not respond to questions.

Former presidents of Central State, Antioch, Otterbein and University of Cincinnati signed a letter from the Charles F. Kettering Foundation that the Supreme Court decision was a blow to democracy. The foundation’s statement said:

The Charles F. Kettering Foundation has been preparing for such a decision for months. Earlier this year, the foundation and the American Association of Colleges and Universities (AAC&U) brought together former college and university presidents in Washington, DC, to form a leadership group to support higher education and its role in American democracy. Also present at the February meeting were representatives of Public Agenda, PEN America, Campus Compact, and Sustained Dialogue Institute.

The group committed to work together to confront urgent challenges to democracy and higher education, such as efforts to undermine public support for higher education and recent and pending state legislation to discourage attention to racial inequality in the curriculum. The statement below is the first product of their work.

The following is a joint statement from the former local presidents and over 100 former college presidents who led institutions in 31 States.

We the undersigned are deeply concerned about the impact the US Supreme Court’s decision in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard will have on our democracy. We are speaking out now in support of our colleagues who are still working in higher education. Today in a split decision, the Court has forbidden colleges and universities from weighing race and ethnicity as one of a wide variety of factors in admissions.

The Court’s insistence that race be ignored strengthens the hand of the wealthy and the privileged in college admissions and undermines efforts to create richly diverse campuses that benefit all students. This will make college campuses significantly less diverse and higher education more segregated. It sends the message that addressing racial inequities is somehow improper. Nothing could be further from the truth; in fact, the decision exposes the actions of the Supreme Court as out of step with the nation it is designed to serve.

This short-sighted decision will have a corrosive impact on higher education and our democracy. America is a great experiment in the idea that a diverse people can live and thrive together across differences of race, ethnicity, religion, and class. Generation Z is more racially and ethnically diverse than any generation before them. Even as they are projected to become majority non-White by 2026, disparities in wealth and income for Black and Latino households continue to grow. A college degree is a gateway to the middle class. Closing the doors of higher education to more students of color will make that inequality worse, not better.

The Court’s decision will have ripple effects far beyond college campuses, stymying the efforts of businesses across the country to diversify their workforces and to serve a changing consumer landscape. The Court’s move clears the way for opponents of diversity to turn back the clock.

It is no accident that the Court’s decision comes at a time when bills attacking diversity in higher education have metastasized in state legislatures across the nation, all attempting to reverse our progress toward a more inclusive democracy.

The future of our democracy depends upon a shared appreciation of our differences. Despite the Court’s decision, we must redouble our efforts and explore alternative means of creating richly diverse college campuses that reflect the nation’s youth. Failure to do so will lead to further backsliding into a less equitable and just society and will entrench the system of inequality that has long plagued our country, perpetuating a cycle of disadvantage in which students from underrepresented groups are unable to access the same opportunities as their peers.

Reporters Michael Clark and Eileen McClory contributed to this story.

About the Author