US News

Supreme Court Declines to Review Admission Policy for Prestigious Boston Schools


Two justices opposed the decision, arguing that the Supreme Court’s ruling contradicts its prior decision last year that abolished affirmative action in college admissions.

The U.S. Supreme Court announced on December 9 that it would not review whether three Boston public schools violated the Constitution with a controversial racial diversity policy that allowed student admissions based on their zip codes.

This new decision follows the court’s significant ruling in Students for Fair Admissions Inc. v. Harvard, which invalidated racially discriminatory admissions policies at U.S. colleges. In the aftermath of that ruling, schools began implementing supposedly race-neutral admission strategies, such as geographic criteria, to enhance diversity within their student bodies.
Conservative justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas dissented against the court’s choice not to accept the petition in Boston Parent Coalition for Academic Excellence v. The School Committee for the City of Boston.
The Boston Parent Coalition submitted its petition on April 17, with representation from the Pacific Legal Foundation.

Beginning with the 2021–22 school year, the school committee altered the admission standards for its competitive “exam schools,” substituting the traditional standardized test with a system based on applicants’ zip codes, which allocated seats for students with the highest grade point averages from each Boston neighborhood.

The petition alleged that even though the quota for each neighborhood was determined by the area’s population of school-aged children, school officials openly expressed their objective to racially balance the Exam Schools to the detriment of Asian American and white applicants.

A federal district court dismissed the lawsuit in 2021. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit upheld this ruling in 2023, concluding that although the zip code-based quota aimed to modify racial demographics, it did not infringe upon students’ equal protection rights.

In his dissent joined by Thomas, Alito stated that the new ruling marks the court’s second refusal to rectify a significant constitutional mistake that threatens to uphold race-based affirmative action in contradiction to the Students for Fair Admissions decision.

This story is ongoing and will be updated as new information emerges.



Source link

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.