A federal judge on Friday upheld the U.S. Naval Academy’s consideration of race in admissions arguing that pursuing diversity in the military is a national security interest.
The ruling is an early blow to Students for Fair Admissions’ latest attempt to extend the scope of its Supreme Court win against Harvard University and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill that gutted the use of race in college admissions. The ruling also comes while the Naval Academy’s admissions process is underway for its next class.
Judge Richard Bennett emphasized in his ruling that the academy is “distinct from a civilian university” because its mission is to prepare its students to become officers in the military. He also said that while race is considered in admissions, the academy does not have racial quotas or engage in racial balancing, and race is not a determinative factor in its process.
Bennett added that the academy proved its national security interest is measurable and its admissions program is narrowly tailored. He also said the court defers to the executive branch on military personnel decisions.
“The program survives strict scrutiny because the Naval Academy has established a compelling national security interest in a diverse officer corps in the Navy and Marine Corps,” Bennett wrote. “Specifically, the Academy has tied its use of race to the realization of an officer corps that represents the country it protects and the people it leads.”
SFFA, an anti-affirmative action group, argued that the Naval Academy has “no justification for using race-based admissions” when using race in admissions is unconstitutional for all other colleges across the country. But the Biden administration has argued the case is nothing like the one against Harvard or UNC because the admissions process and applicant pool are different. The administration also argued SFFA was overreading the ruling in the case against Harvard because the Supreme Court explicitly did not address military academies’ admissions policies.
The high court, in siding with SFFA against Harvard, had said it could not address admissions at the schools because of “potentially distinct interests that military academies may present.”
SFFA President Edward Blum said the group was "disappointed" in the ruling and will appeal the case to the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
"If we are unsuccessful there, then we will appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court,” he said in a statement. “It is our hope that the U.S. military academies ultimately will be compelled to follow the Supreme Court’s prohibition of race in college admissions.”
The American Civil Liberties Union, which had filed an amicus brief on behalf of the National Association of Black Military Women in the case, lauded Bennett's decision as a rejection of SFFA's attempt to extend the scope of the Harvard ruling and an affirmation of the importance of diversity.
“For decades, Black service members — especially Black women — have faced systemic barriers in the military that limit their advancement and visibility,” said Latia Suttle, national public relations officer of the National Association of Black Military Women, in a statement. “Today’s ruling is a reaffirmation that the military’s strength lies in its diversity, and that a diverse leadership is essential to fostering an environment where all service members can thrive.”
What’s next: President-elect Donald Trump may push to exclude factoring race into admissions decisions for military academies in his second term.
In his first administration, the Justice Department used Title VI to sue Yale University following a two-year investigation into the Ivy League institution’s admissions practice. It was the administration’s strongest move to rebuke the use of race in university admissions — one that Trump has promised to continue. His DOJ could likely change its stance on the case if SFFA decides to appeal.
SFFA is also suing West Point over using race in admissions decisions.
Comments
Post a Comment