Prom
Backed by
The Supreme Court decided not to hear cases on college admissions, gender identity, and gun rights. Conservative justices expressed their dissatisfaction with the court’s decision not to address important issues in these areas.
Written by Adam Liptak
Reporting live from the
On Monday, the Supreme Court decided not to hear cases regarding admissions policies, gender identity, and gun control. Conservative justices expressed disagreement with this decision, indicating possible divisions within the court about when to tackle significant issues left unresolved by previous rulings.
Lawsuits were filed regarding the admission policies at three prestigious public schools in Boston, a Wisconsin school district’s procedure for informing parents about students’ gender transitions, and a gun law in Hawaii.
Four justices with conservative views expressed their belief that the court should move more quickly to resolve issues brought up by recent decisions regarding race-based admissions in colleges and universities and the Second Amendment. They also anticipate that more questions will arise from a case being argued on Wednesday, which involves gender transition care for minors and will be decided next year.
As usual, the court did not provide any explanations for its decision not to review all three cases.
The situation in Boston was similar to one in Virginia that was rejected by the court in February. In both cases, parents were contesting changes made to admissions criteria at public schools that did not explicitly consider race in order to increase diversity in enrollment. The question of whether these indirect efforts are constitutional was left unresolved by the court’s decision last year, which invalidated the admissions plans at Harvard and the University of North Carolina in the case Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard College.
In Boston, school administrators changed how students are admitted by moving away from relying solely on grades and test scores. Instead, they now assign seats based on grades within each ZIP code. As a result, the percentage of Black students increased from 14 percent to 23 percent, while the percentage of white students decreased from 40 percent to 31 percent.
Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. and Justice Clarence Thomas disagreed with the decision. Alito argued that the schools’ plan is essentially using a different term for racial balancing and is therefore not in line with the constitution.
We are experiencing difficulties in accessing the content of the article.
To use this website properly, make sure to turn on JavaScript
We appreciate your understanding as we confirm your access. If you are currently in Reader mode, please log out and sign in to your Times account, or consider subscribing to access all of The Times’ content.
We appreciate your understanding as we confirm access.
Are you currently a member? Please sign in.
Interested in receiving all of The Times? Sign up for a subscription
Prom
Index of the website
Navigation to find site information