The China Mail - US Supreme Court bans the use of race in university admissions

USD -
AED 3.672504
AFN 65.000368
ALL 81.216919
AMD 362.051328
ANG 1.789785
AOA 917.000367
ARS 1515.25437
AUD 1.435956
AWG 1.80125
AZN 1.70397
BAM 1.739803
BBD 2.01708
BDT 123.195303
BGN 1.747831
BHD 0.378775
BIF 2997.464751
BMD 1
BND 1.281146
BOB 11.69239
BRL 5.065104
BSD 1.001468
BTN 95.050483
BWP 13.720589
BYN 3.015879
BYR 19600
BZD 2.014233
CAD 1.41575
CDF 2313.50392
CHF 0.825932
CLF 0.024881
CLP 979.255437
CNY 6.691204
CNH 6.686704
COP 3173.953654
CRC 455.099408
CUC 1
CUP 24.035938
CVE 98.087444
CZK 21.645304
DJF 178.33919
DKK 6.651204
DOP 61.433083
DZD 133.824668
EGP 53.529689
ERN 15
ETB 163.585998
EUR 0.889904
FJD 2.26765
FKP 0.750199
GBP 0.752078
GEL 2.590391
GGP 0.750199
GHS 11.695058
GIP 0.750199
GMD 73.503851
GNF 8810.21216
GTQ 7.652004
GYD 209.527198
HKD 7.84815
HNL 26.885202
HRK 6.703804
HTG 131.147978
HUF 323.310388
IDR 18053
ILS 3.09465
IMP 0.750199
INR 94.965504
IQD 1518.213762
IRR 1795877.503816
ISK 121.180386
JEP 0.750199
JMD 159.195837
JOD 0.70904
JPY 158.01504
KES 130.098296
KGS 87.450384
KHR 4070.631144
KMF 440.00035
KPW 899.999961
KRW 1334.740383
KWD 0.31082
KYD 0.834586
KZT 453.195748
LAK 22534.359294
LBP 89683.40524
LKR 331.690611
LRD 170.751234
LSL 16.462394
LTL 2.95274
LVL 0.60489
LYD 6.431526
MAD 9.729662
MDL 17.966464
MGA 4507.405595
MKD 54.836988
MMK 2099.858992
MNT 3597.263832
MOP 8.096339
MRU 40.037362
MUR 47.230378
MVR 15.460378
MWK 1736.600987
MXN 18.492904
MYR 4.083204
MZN 63.903729
NAD 16.462394
NGN 1331.210377
NIO 36.854512
NOK 9.427704
NPR 152.081128
NZD 1.767253
OMR 0.382413
PAB 1.001468
PEN 3.444825
PGK 4.547436
PHP 62.986038
PKR 277.237468
PLN 3.88825
PYG 5719.877241
QAR 3.660721
RON 4.730604
RSD 104.461148
RUB 84.13468
RWF 1478.183516
SAR 3.752837
SBD 8.064647
SCR 13.905529
SDG 601.503676
SEK 9.912404
SGD 1.282104
SHP 0.754745
SLE 24.680371
SLL 20969.504398
SOS 572.343548
SRD 37.794504
STD 20697.981008
STN 21.794245
SVC 8.763065
SYP 13001.999685
SZL 16.455989
THB 33.445038
TJS 9.228751
TMT 3.51
TND 2.98768
TOP 2.40776
TRY 49.513804
TTD 6.798915
TWD 32.453604
TZS 2646.44398
UAH 44.920874
UGX 4136.458658
UYU 40.314905
UZS 12073.121914
VES 878.910604
VND 25894.5
VUV 119.757204
WST 2.787783
XAF 583.738825
XAG 0.017551
XAU 0.000240063761
XCD 2.70255
XCG 1.804919
XDR 0.707052
XOF 583.738825
XPF 106.089045
YER 236.150363
ZAR 16.494037
ZMK 9001.203584
ZMW 20.049815
ZWL 321.999592
SSP 5758.113256
MXV 2.088032
  • RYCEF

    0.4000

    19.71

    +2.03%

  • CMSC

    0.0000

    20.4

    0%

  • BTI

    0.4200

    56.05

    +0.75%

  • BP

    0.2800

    44.43

    +0.63%

  • RBGPF

    1.6000

    67

    +2.39%

  • RIO

    -0.1500

    94.41

    -0.16%

  • AZN

    -0.4300

    166.15

    -0.26%

  • GSK

    0.4600

    49.7

    +0.93%

  • BCE

    -0.4100

    20.56

    -1.99%

  • NGG

    -0.2500

    75.24

    -0.33%

  • VOD

    -0.0400

    16.58

    -0.24%

  • RELX

    -0.4500

    33.07

    -1.36%

  • BCC

    -0.5500

    76.59

    -0.72%

  • CMSD

    -0.0300

    20.27

    -0.15%

  • JRI

    -0.2500

    10.77

    -2.32%

US Supreme Court bans the use of race in university admissions
US Supreme Court bans the use of race in university admissions / Photo: © AFP

US Supreme Court bans the use of race in university admissions

The US Supreme Court on Thursday banned the use of race and ethnicity in university admissions, dealing a major blow to a decades-old practice that boosted educational opportunities for African-Americans and other minorities.

Text size:

"The student must be treated based on his or her experiences as an individual -- not on the basis of race," Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in the majority opinion.

The justices broke six to three along conservative-liberal lines in the decision, which came after years of conservative antipathy to "affirmative action" policies that have sought diversity in school admissions and business and government hiring.

The court said that universities were free to consider an individual applicant's personal experience -- whether, for example, they grew up experiencing racism -- in weighing their application over applicants more academically qualified.

But deciding primarily based on whether the applicant is white, Black or other is itself racial discrimination, Roberts wrote.

"Our constitutional history does not tolerate that choice," he said.

The court sided with an activist group, Students for Fair Admissions, that sued the oldest private and public institutions of higher education in the country -- elite Harvard University and the University of North Carolina (UNC) -- over their admissions policies.

The group claimed that race-conscious admissions policies discriminated against equally or better-qualified Asian Americans competing to enter the two universities.

Harvard and UNC, like a number of other competitive US schools, consider an applicant's race or ethnicity as a factor to ensure a diverse student body and representation of minorities.

Such affirmative action policies arose from the Civil Rights Movement in the 1960s aiming to help address the legacy of discrimination in higher education against African Americans.

Thursday's ruling was a victory for conservatives, some who have argued that affirmative action is fundamentally unfair.

Others have said the policy has outlived its need because educational opportunities have vastly improved for Blacks and other minorities.

But the ruling was a major setback to progressives, one year after the court overturned the landmark 1973 "Roe v. Wade" decision guaranteeing a woman's right to abortion.

The end to federally guaranteed abortion rights almost immediately led to half of the 50 states banning or severely curtailing the practice.

The affirmative action ruling could have the same effect of many states and institutions halting programs designed to give disadvantaged minorities extra consideration in the competitive college admissions process.

Leading the dissenters, Justice Sonia Sotomayor said the decision "rolls back decades of precedent and momentous progress."

"In so holding, the Court cements a superficial rule of colorblindness as a constitutional principle in an endemically segregated society," she wrote.

A.Zhang--ThChM