Going back in time for a moment, a June 2003 Supreme Court ruling on affirmative action in higher education in Grutter v. Bollinger involving a white student and the University of Michigan law school said that race can be a factor in university admission decisions. The ruling did not give carte blanche legal authority to use race in an admissions rating scale though. The pivotal factor in this case was that favoring minorities was intended to achieve diversity goals because the school valued diversity in its student body and not because it was trying to overcome past discrimination. In fact, in a second ruling in Gratz v. Bollinger, also involving a white student and the University of Michigan, the court decided that a point system for admissions, in which minorities were automatically awarded additional points on a rating scale, violated the Constitution’s equal protection provision.

There were two different cases and two different rulings in June 2003, and together they in effect said that race can be used in affirmative action programs to achieve diversity goals but not to simply reverse past racial injustice. At the time, Justice Sandra Day O’Connor said in the Grutter case, “We expect that 25 years from now, the use of racial preferences will no longer be necessary to further the interest approved today.”

The question now is whether the 25 years has turned into nine years because a new case is going to be reviewed by the Supreme Court. In this case, another student has filed a reverse discrimination case at the University of Texas. In Fisher v. University of Texas, a white female student has claimed that she was denied admission to the school in favor of less qualified students. There is concern that a favorable ruling for the student could effectively end affirmative action programs at colleges and universities. The University of Texas said it’s not using quotas and is only trying to add diversity to the student body.

This recent case will have a profound effect on admissions into colleges and universities. If the court rules in favor of the University of Texas, schools will be allowed to continue race-based affirmative action programs meant to add diversity to the student body. If the court rules in favor of Fisher and overturns Gutter vs. Bollinger, thus abolishing affirmative action, there is a fear that the underrepresented will once again face a more difficult time overcoming the socioeconomic marginalization that characterizes many minority groups.

Should the court rule against the University of Texas and diversity can no longer serve as a legal justification for preferences, the racial mix of the nation’s higher education student bodies is sure to change over time. That may equate to returning to the days before Grutter vs. Bollinger in which the typical student body at public colleges and universities was composed of fewer minorities and more white students.

However, this case could have consequences that extend beyond the campus boundaries if legal justification for diversity is abolished. Diversity goes hand-in-hand with inclusion and eliminating its legal standing means that this case could also apply to other areas like employment practices. The reality is that it all comes down to how the court defines equal opportunity. The question is whether racial classification is necessary to provide equal opportunity. If it is not necessary to provide equal opportunity to students, then why would it be necessary for deciding who to recruit and hire for employment?

It is highly possible that race based admissions standards meant to increase student body diversity will be ended once Fisher vs. University of Texas is decided. The Grutter v. Bollinger decision was 5-4, and the deciding vote was Justice Sandra Day O’Connor. She has since retired and was replaced by a judge who has not been favorable to affirmative action programs in the past.

There is ongoing debate as to how much the racial mix of students would change should diversity cease being a legal justification for racial preferences. There is no debate on whether it will change.