Higher education officials around the country — including those in Colorado — are closely watching what could be a pivotal U.S. Supreme Court case on how and whether race can be used as a factor in college admissions.
We hope that when the court issues an opinion in Fisher vs. University of Texas, the justices see their way clear to continue allowing race to be a factor that may be considered as colleges contemplate who to admit.
At the University of Colorado, for instance, race and ethnicity are among a group of secondary factors that may be considered. But first, all students must meet primary academic standards that include test scores, grades and quality of high school courses. Then the school will consider not just race, but also factors such as whether applicants are military veterans, whether they are first-generation college students, or whether they are uniquely talented in the arts or athletics.
These considerations allow CU to bring together students whose differences make the college experience that much more rich and varied.
The Supreme Court case that was argued this week puts that ability to purposely choose a racially diverse class at risk, not just at CU, but at colleges around the nation.
The challenge was brought by Abigail Fisher, a white woman denied admission to University of Texas at Austin. She contends even the modest racial preferences allowable by law should not be permissible.
To be clear, these are far from racial quotas, which were found to be unconstitutional in prior cases that have come before the court.
So long as students are academically qualified, racial preferences are a way to provide opportunities to minorities and create a community of people from different walks of life.
The questions from justices hearing the high-interest Fisher case this week have given rise to speculation that decades of precedent allowing race to be considered in admissions could be overturned.
Such a decision could reverberate beyond education and could affect the military and business.
Choosing people who have lived different lives — whether it is by virtue of race, socio-economic status or other circumstances — creates diversity that ultimately benefits society as a whole. We hope the court does not gut the law allowing race to be among those considerations.
