I do not intend to promote/create any bias regarding affirmative action (AA) policies. I just want to provide background information about AA.
This isn't the first time affirmative action has reached the Supreme Court. Regents of the University of California v Bakke (1978) was the first instance when affirmative action policies were challenged. Allan Bakke, a White applicant was rejected two years in a row from UC Davis' medical school despite having much higher MCAT scores than the "minority" applicants accepted under affirmative actions. Bakke asserted that the policy discriminated against him due to his race. The Supreme Court ruled in his favor (he was admitted) and declared that no university could set aside quotas for particular groups.
There was a loophole, though. Universities could still use race as a criterion for admissions, but it had to be weighed fairly against other factors. To this date, race has remained a criterion. The Supreme Court can go either way.
Irrespective of what happens, no need to worry. If you're from a minority race and AA is abandoned, that doesn't correlate with rejection from your dream college. Besides, you shouldn't be banking on race as a criterion to get into your dream schools. If you're from a majority race and AA is upheld, use that as a motivation to be the best.
Thanks for reading till the end! Remember, the Supreme Court doesn't define your success; your hard work, persistence, talents, abilities, and personality make do!
It is very easy to be misjudged about this. IMO "certain authorities" are just pitting marginalized groups against each other instead of focusing on other exceptions like legacies, donors, and athletes. As an Asian American, I was very disappointed in the whole campaign of suing Havard because of my race and AA. To feel that Black and other groups of color are not trying as hard as you, now that's just internalized racism, my boi. Minorities in THAT COLLEGE deserve to have an equal footing as others.
To keep this community safe and supportive: