Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College

Students for Fair Admissions (SFFA), a nonprofit organization, challenged the admissions programs at Harvard College and the University of North Carolina, both of which considered race as a factor in holistic admissions review. SFFA argued that Harvard's program discriminated against Asian American applicants by assigning them lower personal ratings and that both programs used race in a manner that violated the Equal Protection Clause. Both universities defended their programs as consistent with Grutter's framework.

Chief Justice Roberts held that the Equal Protection Clause applies without regard to race and that racial classifications must satisfy strict scrutiny. The Court found that the diversity interests asserted by the universities were not sufficiently coherent or measurable to be compelling interests amenable to judicial review. The programs effectively used race as a determinative factor for some applicants, treated applicants as members of racial groups rather than individuals, and operated as racial balancing. Roberts noted that applicants could still discuss how race affected their lives in personal essays, but race itself could not be used as a factor in admissions decisions.

The decision required universities nationwide to eliminate race as a factor in admissions, transforming higher education admissions practices across the country. It effectively ended the diversity rationale for affirmative action that had governed since Bakke. Universities have since explored race-neutral alternatives to maintain diverse student bodies, with varying degrees of success.