Western Pa. campuses say diversity will remain priority following high court ruling

Just as they had before Thursday’s U.S. Supreme Court decision striking down affirmative action in college admissions, campuses across Western Pennsylvania made one thing clear within hours after the historic ruling.

They said they will find ways to keep their classes diverse, even without direct use of race.

What that looks like could become clearer in the weeks and months ahead as campuses sift through the voluminous ruling in the twin Supreme Court cases to see the extent, if any, that nuance could allow race to remain in the admissions process.

Many campus officials already say they use non-race factors, from extracurricular activities and an applicant’s geography to socioeconomic factors. Many area campuses are among the more than 80% of colleges and universities nationally that either do not require or do not consider SAT and ACT scores, according to a tally by the group FairTest released this month.

In a note to students and employees Thursday, Duquesne University President Ken Gormley called the Supreme Court ruling “disappointing.”

He said the decision in the cases involving Harvard University and the University of North Carolina “will not affect our long-standing commitment to diversity” and that Duquesne will continue to focus “on a range of factors, apart from race, that contribute to identifying students of all backgrounds who will succeed at Duquesne and become the next generation of leaders.”

A statement from University of Pittsburgh Provost Ann Cudd indicated the school’s admissions decisions on the main Oakland campus and branches in Bradford, Greensburg, Johnstown and Titusville will continue to be guided by the belief “all of our students can and should benefit.”

“In the wake of today’s ruling, these guiding principles remain unchanged, and we are evaluating our admission practices to ensure that they continue to be inclusive, fair and fully compliant with the law,” she said.

Carnegie Mellon University President Farnam Jahanian made a similar point.

“A diverse class of scholars encourages students to question their own assumptions, test perceived truths and appreciate the complexity of the modern world. As we continue to evaluate today’s ruling, we have confidence in our ability both to follow the law and to promote access and opportunity as essential to fostering a vibrant learning community,” Jahanian said.

Indiana University of Pennsylvania previously has said that it does not use race in its decision-making.

IUP is part of the State System of Higher Education, whose 10 state-owned universities also include the Western Pennsylvania campuses of Penn West University (California, Clarion and Edinboro) and Slippery Rock University.

“We are reviewing the Supreme Court’s ruling, which we expect will have minimal impact on PASSHE universities,” State System of Higher Education spokesman Kevin Hensil said.

“The decision mostly affects universities with very limited admissions, whereas PASSHE universities — serving nearly 85,000 students — are state-owned, public institutions with a mission to make higher education accessible to Pennsylvanians at the lowest possible cost,” he said.

Penn State spokesman Wyatt Dubois said in a statement that the university “remains resolute that diversity among students, faculty and staff deepens the educational experience Penn State offers.”

“People with differing perspectives and from different backgrounds — be they racial or ethnic, financial, geographic, or cultural, to name a few — greatly contribute to the academic discourse that is vital to higher education,” Dubois said.

Seton Hill University President Mary Finger said she stands behind a statement issued earlier Thursday in Washington, D.C., by the Association of Catholic Colleges and Universities, of which she is vice chair of its board of directors.

The ruling “is more than disappointing as it ignores the more-than-apparent effects of continued racism in our society.

“In doing so, it undermines the work that higher education has voluntarily taken on for many decades to be a solution in a society that provides too few solutions for this social evil,” the statement read.

In 1978, a landmark Supreme Court decision in Regents of the University of California v. Bakke held that affirmative action was permissible by colleges.

In the 45 years since, use of race in admissions decisions had survived various Supreme Court challenges, though schools’ discretion in how it can be applied has narrowed.

In a 2003 case, Grutter v. Bollinger, the Supreme Court held that race could be used, but only among other factors. An applicant to the University of Michigan’s Law School sued, alleging she was denied admission because the school favored minority groups.

What proved the undoing for affirmative action in college decision-making stems from lawsuits in 2014 against two elite institutions.

Harvard is the nation’s oldest private college, and North Carolina is the nation’s oldest public institution. The cases against both were brought in 2014 by Students for Fair Admissions, an advocacy and legal group based in Arlington, Va., that sought to remove race and ethnicity from college admissions.

The 20,000-member organization, including students and parents, said on its website that “racial classifications and preferences in college admissions are unfair, unnecessary and unconstitutional.”

The group alleged both schools were “engaged in unfair, polarizing and illegal racial discrimination in their admissions policies.”

“No one is under any illusions that we live in a post-racial society, or that racial discrimination is a thing of the past,” the group said in a statement. “But, when our most elite universities place high-schoolers on racial registers and tell the world that their skin color affects what they think and know, what they like and don’t like, they are hurting, not helping.”

Higher education groups saw it differently.

They argued race is a legitimate tool to promote diversity on campuses and that colleges and universities should have “autonomy and academic freedom” to consider perspectives and points from those “who believe their racial or ethnic identity plays a role in their life experiences, leadership skills or potential campus contribution.”

A ban on considering race in admissions decisions would leave students of color to either refrain from speaking about their ethnicity or race or do so knowing it would be ignored, wrote the American Council on Education in a brief filed on behalf of 39 other higher education groups.

“Students discussing socioeconomic status, gender, age, disability or experiences as veterans, musicians or first-generation learners all could speak freely,” the council brief said. “(A ban on considering race in admissions decisions) would create a unique, distinct disadvantaging of racial and ethnic minorities and impose unique and impermissible content restrictions on expressive activity.”

Nine states prohibit public colleges and universities from considering race in admissions decisions: Arizona, California, Florida, Georgia, Michigan, Nebraska, New Hampshire, Oklahoma and Washington.

After Thursday’s ruling, FairTest said the Supreme Court’s decision supports more reliance on a holistic approach to admissions and less use of standardized tests, which it says disadvantages first-generation students and minorities and is not a good predictor of college success.

“Performance on the ACT, SAT, GRE, GMAT and LSAT is closely tied to race and socioeconomic status,” said Harry Feder, executive director of FairTest. “With the new Supreme Court requirement to eliminate ‘race-conscious’ factors, efforts to de-emphasize standardized exam scores in admissions and financial aid must accelerate.”

Officials with the Pittsburgh and Greensburg-Jeannette NAACP could not immediately be reached, but, in Washington, D.C., the organization’s leadership said the ruling rolled back decades of precedent on affirmative action and jeopardizes hard-fought progress by Black Americans in the classroom and beyond.

“Today, the Supreme Court has bowed to the personally held beliefs of an extremist minority,” NAACP President and CEO Derrick Johnson said in a statement. “Let me be clear: Affirmative action exists because we cannot rely on colleges, universities and employers to enact admissions and hiring practices that embrace diversity, equity and inclusion.”