‘The Bunker, Not The Boardroom’: Supreme Court Ruling Permits Affirmative Action For Military Academies
- Oops!Something went wrong.Please try again later.
- Oops!Something went wrong.Please try again later.
- Oops!Something went wrong.Please try again later.
There was a striking exception to the conservative Supreme Court majority’s decision ending race-based affirmative action in higher education on Thursday: military academies.
The U.S. government said using race as a factor in admissions to military academies can “further compelling interests,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in a footnote to his opinion. “This opinion… does not address the issue, in light of the potentially distinct interests that military academies may present.”
The distinction suggests that there could be value in using race to diversify at least some American institutions ― namely, the U.S. military’s officer corps ― but Roberts’ overall decision says that it would be unconstitutional to do so at public and private colleges and universities.
Two liberal justices on the court criticized that approach.
“The Court has come to rest on the bottom-line conclusion that racial diversity in higher education is only worth potentially preserving insofar as it might be needed to prepare Black Americans and other underrepresented minorities for success in the bunker, not the boardroom,” wrote Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson in her dissent.
She called that position “a particularly awkward place to land, in light of the history the majority opts to ignore.”
Justice Sonia Sotomayor highlighted the exception in her dissent as evidence that her conservative colleagues see a constitutional basis for considering race in college admissions.
“To the extent, the Court suggests national security interests are ‘distinct,’ those interests cannot explain the Court’s narrow exemption, as national security interests are also implicated at civilian universities,” Sotomayor continued.
Roberts called the exemption justified because no military academies were involved in the cases in question. Yet Sotomayor pointed out that he and his five conservative colleagues did not exempt other institutions that were not parties to the cases, like religious universities.
The 6-3 decision risks perpetuating the perception that the U.S. military preys on BIPOC communities.
“Die for us, but don’t enroll in our schools. The most disturbing part of the decision is that it exempts military academies,” activist and Georgetown Law adjunct professor Arjun Sethi tweeted after the ruling. “It shows the stranglehold that war [and] defense have over American life; how the military always gets deference; and how America devalues diverse lives.”
Broadly, studies show that affirmative action policies help students from historically marginalized groups secure more spots on campuses. Advocates for the policies say they are vital to assisting Americans from those backgrounds get higher-paying jobs and better educations than they otherwise would, given America’s history of reserving the path to those opportunities for white men from privileged backgrounds.
In addition to evening the playing field, the policies promoted diversity in private and government institutions, their supporters say, making such organizations better reflect America’s population and making them more effective.
“Placing a diverse Armed Forces under the command of homogenous leadership is a recipe for internal resentment, discord, and violence,” 35 retired admirals and generals, including four former joint chiefs of staff, wrote in a brief they filed with the Supreme Court as judges considered the affirmative action cases.
“By contrast, units that are diverse across all levels are more cohesive, collaborative, and effective,” the former military leaders contended. “The importance of diverse leadership has risen to new heights in recent years, as international conflicts and humanitarian crises require the military to perform civil functions that call for heightened cultural awareness and sensitivity to ethnic and religious issues. All service members — minority or otherwise — are better equipped to meet these challenges if they are educated in a racially diverse environment and guided by diverse leadership in the field.”
The U.S. has ramped up diversity at officers’ academies in recent decades under Republican and Democratic administrations.
“It is a critical national security imperative to attain diversity within the officer corps. And, at present, it’s not possible to achieve that diversity without race-conscious admissions, including at the nation’s service academies,” solicitor general Elizabeth Prelogar told the Supreme Court in October.
Justice Samuel Alito, an ultraconservative, responded that he and his colleagues would have to take that point “very seriously.”
Thursday’s rulings suggested that the Court only partially did so.
