1. Princeton University
Dear Princeton community,
Today the United States Supreme Court backed away from more than fifty years of established case law allowing colleges and universities to take race into account as one factor among many in a holistic admission process. Those precedents wisely recognized that colleges and universities must have some discretion to determine how best to find and attract the talent that exists in every sector of our society. Today’s decision narrows that discretion significantly.
This morning’s opinion is unwelcome and disappointing, but it is not unexpected. Princeton has been preparing for this possibility with assistance and advice from legal counsel. While today’s decision will make our work more difficult, we will work vigorously to preserve — and, indeed, grow — the diversity of our community while fully respecting the law as announced today.
I may have more to say after my colleagues and I have had an opportunity to examine the details of today’s decision. For now, I will reiterate principles and commitments fundamental to this University’s mission:
- Talent exists in every sector of American society, and we have an obligation to attract exceptional people of every background and enable them to flourish on our campus.
- Diversity benefits learning and scholarship by broadening the range of questions, perspectives, and experiences brought to bear on important topics throughout the University.
- Our multicultural society requires that, in the words of Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, “the path to leadership [must] be visibly open to talented and qualified individuals of every race and ethnicity.”
For all these reasons and more, diversity is essential to the excellence of this University and to the future of our country and the world. Princeton will pursue it with energy, persistence, and a determination to succeed despite the restrictions imposed by the Supreme Court in its regrettable decision today.
Christopher L. Eisgruber
President, Princeton University
2. Yale university
June 29, 2023
Dear Members of the Yale Community,
This morning, the Supreme Court issued decisions in two cases that examine the consideration of race in admissions. It will take some time to fully consider the implications of the Court’s decisions and review our admissions policies in light of them. As we do this work, I write today to reaffirm Yale’s unwavering commitment to creating and sustaining a diverse and inclusive community. This principle is core to our mission of teaching aspiring leaders to serve all sectors of society and improving the world through research and scholarship, education, preservation, and practice. We will continue to foster diversity in its many dimensions and will use all lawful means to achieve it.
As I consider today’s rulings, I am deeply troubled, but I also have hope when I reflect on the words of the Reverend Pauli Murray, eminent Yale graduate, civil rights icon, and namesake of one of our residential colleges. In 1979, the Reverend Murray remarked that “true community is based upon equality, mutuality, and reciprocity. It affirms the richness of individual diversity as well as the common human ties that bind us together.” These principles have guided Yale in the long journey to bring the promise of higher education to more students, including veterans through the GI Bill, women with the advent of coeducation, and those from underrepresented groups by increasing racial and socioeconomic diversity. Yale is committed to continue this journey and build on the progress we have achieved together.
As we argued in the amicus (friend-of-the-court) brief that Yale filed in the Harvard and University of North Carolina cases together with several other universities last year, diversity vitally enhances higher education. A student body that is diverse across every dimension, including race, improves academic outcomes for all students, enhances the range of scholarship and teaching on campus, improves critical thinking, and advances the understanding and study of complex topics. Generations of Yale students, alumni, faculty, and staff can attest that Yale’s diverse educational environment has positively contributed to their creativity, adaptability, and leadership.
A whole-person admission review process that takes into account every aspect of an applicant’s background and experiences has enabled colleges and universities to admit the classes they need to realize their missions. Restricting this ability limits universities in opening their doors to students with the widest possible range of experiences. This is a detriment to everyone who benefits from the diversity of our campuses.
Beyond Yale, and as evidenced by the broad range of voices that joined Yale in submitting amicus briefs in the case, as a nation and global society, we are strengthened by a higher education system that admits and graduates into the workforce diverse and excellent cohorts of students. To the extent today’s decisions impede progress in this regard, I believe they have done the nation a disservice.
Despite my strong disagreement with the Court’s decisions, I am committed to the rule of law. In the coming months, deans of admissions and other university leaders will review Yale’s admissions policies to ensure that Yale College, the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, and every professional school comply with the law as interpreted by the Supreme Court. Going forward, schools will communicate as needed to their prospective and current students, as well as faculty, staff, and alumni. In September, Yale Law School will host a panel discussion for members of the Yale community. Panelists will share their expert perspectives and legal analysis on the Court’s ruling.
In 1964, during another challenging time in this nation’s history, Yale’s seventeenth president, Kingman Brewster Jr., stated, “our educational as well as moral obligation is to reaffirm the ideals we believe in.” I agree strongly with that sentiment. The Court’s decisions may signal a new legal interpretation, but Yale’s core values will not change. Today, I emphatically reaffirm that Yale is fully committed to creating an inclusive, diverse, and excellent educational environment; to welcoming students of all racial and ethnic backgrounds; and to ensuring that our university is home to a diverse range of ideas, expertise, and experiences.
Sincerely,
Peter Salovey, President
Chris Argyris Professor of Psychology
3.Columbia University
By Lee C. Bollinger (The Economist)
June 29, 2023
"Educational institutions must remain committed to the well-supported judgment that students benefit from a diverse learning environment that prepares them to function and lead in a diverse world. We have the expertise, and the right under the First Amendment to provide that to our students. Now universities must find new ways to exercise that right."
4. Johns Hopkins university
Dear Johns Hopkins Community,
Today, the Supreme Court issued decisions in two long-awaited cases: Students for Fair Admissions v. President and Fellows of Harvard College and Students for Fair Admissions v. University of North Carolina. The court found in favor of the petitioners and has determined that the race conscious admissions policies at Harvard and UNC violate federal law. We continue to review the Supreme Court’s opinions in the cases, but it is clear that the court’s decision severely curtails the consideration of race as a factor for the purpose of seeking student body diversity.
For many of us, today’s decision is a significant setback in our efforts to build a university community that represents the rich diversity of America.
We know that a variety of different barriers have long prevented students from a host of different backgrounds from accessing higher education at institutions like ours. We also know that a diverse student body enriches the educational experience and better equips our students to assume the responsibilities of citizenship.
Today’s decision appears to leave intact the programs we have created to recruit students who are the first in their families to attend college or who are from families with limited income—now composing almost a third of our undergraduate first-year class—as well as those who come from rural and urban communities across our country and who hold diverse beliefs and perspectives. But there is no doubt that the success we have enjoyed in ensuring full participation of underrepresented students is jeopardized by this decision.
This is particularly distressing given the long history of racial discrimination in our country and the relatively brief period of time during which we have succeeded in recruiting significant numbers of outstanding underrepresented students to Johns Hopkins. As recently as 2010, Black students made up only 6% and Hispanic students only 8% of Hopkins’ entering undergraduate class. Today, Black students make up 16% and Hispanic students nearly 24% of the class. And it goes without saying that these students are among those with the strongest academic credentials in the country.
We remain deeply committed to the progress we have made and even more so to the extraordinary people who make up our undergraduate and graduate student bodies.
These decisions do not diminish our resolve. In the coming days, we will closely examine the court’s decisions and assess its implications for our admissions programs. Over the last several months, we have been reviewing the approaches taken by universities in states where a referendum or statute has restricted the use of race as one of many factors in a holistic admissions process. Drawing on the lessons of their experience, we will, to the best of our ability, continue to reduce the barriers that stand between exceptional students and the promise of equal opportunity that forms the bedrock of our country and our university.
Sincerely,
Ron
5. Northwestern University
In a letter addressed to the Northwestern University community Thursday, President Michael Schill said he was “deeply disappointed” in a decision that “will make it more difficult for Northwestern to achieve one of our imperatives — the promotion of diversity, inclusion and belonging on our campuses.”
“There is much to find problematic in the Court’s decision, but for me, among the most troubling elements is the doubt it casts on the importance of a diverse class in enhancing our educational mission,” Schill wrote. “Bringing together people of different backgrounds, viewpoints and experiences enables us to learn from one another and propels our research, arts and discovery to new levels, allowing us to have an even greater impact on the world. Today’s ruling does not change that commitment.”
A working group of leaders at the university has been examining Northwestern’s practices and how to address the implications of the ruling. Schill said the group will now focus on ensuring the university abides by the law while “still protecting and supporting our institutional commitment to diversity.”
6. Duke University
To the Duke Community,
I write with an update following today’s Supreme Court decision regarding the race-conscious admissions plans at Harvard and UNC-Chapel Hill.
Duke’s position continues to be that diversity is absolutely vital to our educational mission–everyone in our community, and the work they do, benefits from differing perspectives, opinions, and life experiences.
We remain steadfastly committed to cultivating a racially and socially equitable Duke to the fullest extent permitted by the law.
Over the coming weeks we will review the decision closely and determine what, if any, changes need to be made to our admission processes. We have already been planning for the many potential procedural implications. As this process unfolds, we remain committed to doing everything we can to foster a vibrant and diverse academic community.
As always, I am grateful for your support as we continue this important work.
And let me say to any current and future members of the Duke community who may now wonder whether Duke is the place for you, let me be clear—we see you, we welcome you, and we will support you.
Sincerely,
