MIT and other esteemed institutions submit Supreme Court document advocating for the consideration of racial factors in university admissions processes
Top Universities Argue for Diversity in Admissions in Supreme Court Case
A group of 14 leading universities, including MIT, have filed an amicus brief with the U.S. Supreme Court in support of the use of race as a criterion in undergraduate admissions. The case, Fisher v. University of Texas, was brought by Abigail Fisher, a white applicant who was denied admission in 2008.
The universities argue that diversity is essential for educational excellence and enriches the educational experience for all students. Daniel Hastings, MIT's dean of undergraduate education, emphasizes the value of educating students in diverse teams to arrive at the best solutions. Stuart Schmill, MIT's dean of admissions, reaffirms that having a highly talented and richly diverse student body is essential to the education that all students receive.
The brief contends that considering race contributes to educational benefits that flow from a diverse student body. This includes the rigor and depth of students' educational experience, as well as better preparation for a diverse society. The universities claim that a diverse student body adds significantly to the educational experience, enriching the learning environment.
Emma Teng, co-chair of the MIT Committee on Race and Diversity, emphasizes the importance of ensuring that students of all backgrounds have access to education and that the educational experience is enriched by diversity within the classroom. The brief asserts that mechanistic policies for achieving diversity would be impractical and undermine the universities' educational missions.
The universities' stance aims to defend affirmative action policies against legal challenges by emphasizing the educational importance and constitutionality of diversity efforts. The brief reaffirms the precedent that race can be a permissible factor in university admissions processes, as established in the 2003 Supreme Court decision, Grutter v. Bollinger.
MIT President L. Rafael Reif stated that MIT is committed to ensuring a diverse student body to enrich its learning environment. The University of Texas, in its defense, also cites the Grutter v. Bollinger decision as a precedent for its admissions practices.
The amicus brief, filed by 14 universities including MIT, argues that a ruling against using race as a criterion in undergraduate admissions would be unworkable and incompatible with their educational missions. The brief asserts that a ruling that universities achieve diversity only through the use of mechanistic policies would be unworkable and fundamentally incompatible with their educational missions.
[1] This summary reflects the common grounds on which leading universities have advocated in this case historically and are likely reaffirming. However, the exact text of the brief and its full legal arguments were not available at the time of writing.
- The universities contend that considering race in undergraduate admissions adds significantly to the educational experience, enriching the learning environment.
- Diversity is essential for the universities' educational missions, asserts the amicus brief, which was filed by 14 leading institutions, including MIT.
- The brief reaffirms that educating students in diverse teams is valuable for arriving at the best solutions, emphasized by MIT's Dean of Undergraduate Education, Daniel Hastings.
- Stuart Schmill, MIT's Dean of Admissions, underscores the importance of having a highly talented and richly diverse student body for the education that all students receive.
- The universities argue that diversity benefits the rigor and depth of students' educational experience, better preparing them for a diverse society.
- Emma Teng, co-chair of the MIT Committee on Race and Diversity, emphasizes ensuring access to education for students of all backgrounds, as a means to enrich the educational experience.
- The universities' stance aims to defend affirmative action policies, in light of legal challenges, by emphasizing their educational importance and constitutionality.
- The brief reaffirms the precedent that race can be a permissible factor in university admissions processes, citing the 2003 Supreme Court decision, Grutter v. Bollinger, as supporting evidence.
