-
Matthew Perry drug middleman jailed for two years
-
Warsh confirmed as Fed chair as central bank faces Trump assault
-
Kohli ton powers Bengaluru past Kolkata, to top of IPL
-
Ex-Nicaragua guerrilla believes Ortega-Murillo days numbered
-
Berlin launches scheme to swap trash for treats
-
Sarah Taylor named England men's fielding coach
-
No plans for PGA outside USA or moving off May date
-
US Senate backs Trump on Iran war despite deadline lapse
-
Key urges 'world-class' bowler Robinson to make England recall count
-
From Black Death to Covid, ships have long hosted outbreaks
-
Furyk wants long-term US Ryder blueprint, maybe role for Tiger
-
McIlroy back on course on eve of PGA despite blister
-
Eulalio seizes control of drenched Giro d'Italia
-
New trial ordered for US lawyer convicted of murdering wife, son
-
Stocks rise ahead of US-China summit
-
US wholesale prices jump 6.0% year-on-year in April, highest since 2022
-
Nations drawing down oil stocks at record pace: IEA
-
Carrick on brink of permanent Man Utd job: reports
-
Strong US economy's resilience to shocks tested by Iran war
-
Italy cheers UK's Catherine on first foreign visit since cancer diagnosis
-
Keys says players will strike over Grand Slam pay if 'necessary'
-
Eurovision stage inspired by Viennese opera
-
Gunshots at Philippine Senate as lawmaker wanted by ICC holds out
-
Winning worth the wait for Young no matter the ball
-
The Chilean town living with the world's most polluting dump
-
Donald pleased to have Rahm back for Ryder three-peat bid
-
Stocks waver, oil steady ahead of US-China summit as Iran talks stall
-
War in Middle East: latest developments
-
No cadmium please: French want less toxin in their baguettes
-
Warsh set to take over a divided Fed facing Trump assaults
-
Shots heard at Philippine Senate as lawmaker wanted by ICC holds out
-
France locks down 1,700 on cruise ship after 90-year-old dies
-
After the hobbits, director Peter Jackson tackles 'Tintin'
-
Real Madrid win legal battle over Bernabeu concert noise
-
EU won't ban LGBTQ 'conversion therapy' but will push states to act
-
Revived Swiatek cruises past Pegula and into Italian Open semis
-
Shots heard at Philippine Senate as lawmaker wanted by ICC holds out: AFP
-
Vin Diesel drives 'Fast and Furious' tribute in Cannes
-
Heckler ejected from Eurovision after Israel song disruption
-
Australia's North savours 'tremendous honour' of England role
-
For hantavirus, experts aim to inform without igniting Covid panic
-
Japan rides box office boom into Cannes
-
Trump arrives in China for superpower summit with Xi
-
UK's Catherine on first official foreign trip since cancer diagnosis
-
British scientists among winners of top Spanish award
-
Mbappe can show 'commitment' to Real Madrid: Arbeloa
-
Chinese tech giant Alibaba posts profit drop amid AI drive
-
King Charles lays out Starmer's agenda as PM fights for survival
-
Japan suspend Eddie Jones for verbally abusing officials
-
England drop Crawley for 1st Test against New Zealand
US Supreme Court's right-wing skeptical of using race in college admissions
The conservative-majority US Supreme Court appeared poised on Monday to ban the use of race as a factor in deciding who gets into America's elite universities.
The top US court heard nearly five hours of arguments on the use of race in admissions to Harvard and the University of North Carolina (UNC) -- respectively the oldest private and public institutions of higher education in the country.
Harvard and UNC, like a number of other top US schools, consider an applicant's race as a factor in trying to ensure a diverse student body and representation of minorities, a policy known as "affirmative action."
It emerged from the Civil Rights Movement in the late 1960s to help address the legacy of discrimination in higher education against African Americans.
The suits against Harvard and UNC were brought by a group known as Students for Fair Admissions, which claims that race-conscious admissions policies discriminate against equally qualified applicants of Asian American origin.
"The racial preference is operating to the disadvantage of Asian American applicants," Patrick Strawbridge, attorney for Students for Fair Admissions, told the court.
"When you use race, you're telling applicants that their race matters," Strawbridge said, calling it "inherently divisive."
"It gets us further away from a world where the government treats race as irrelevant," he said.
Strawbridge's arguments appeared to get a sympathetic hearing from the conservative justices on the court, setting the stage for another potential historic reversal like in June, when the high court overturned its landmark 1973 "Roe v. Wade" decision guaranteeing a woman's right to abortion.
Conservatives currently enjoy a solid 6-3 majority on the Supreme Court, including three justices nominated by former president Donald Trump, a Republican.
- 'Don't have a clue what it means' -
Justice Clarence Thomas, a longtime opponent of affirmative action, said he could not think of another case "where the court deferred to the alleged discriminator."
"I've heard the word diversity quite a few times and I don't have a clue what it means," he added. "It seems to mean everything for everyone."
Conservative justices John Roberts, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett repeatedly pressed the attorneys for Harvard and UNC about when there would be an "end point" to affirmative action.
"Your position is that race matters because it's necessary for diversity," Roberts said. "It's not going to stop mattering at some particular point.
"You're always going to have to look at race because you say race matters to give us the necessary diversity."
Justice Elena Kagan and the other two liberal justices on the court pushed back against the arguments put forward by Students for Fair Admissions.
"For decades, this court has rightly recognized that student body diversity is a compelling interest that can justify limited consideration of race in university admissions," Kagan said.
"That holding recognizes a simple but profound truth -- when students of all races and backgrounds come to college and live together and learn together they become better colleagues, better citizens and better leaders," she said.
"In your view, it really wouldn't matter if there was a precipitous decline in minority admissions," Kagan said to Strawbridge. "Your brief says it just doesn't matter if our institutions look like America.
"Doesn't it?" she asked.
- 'Cause racial diversity to plummet' -
The administration of Democratic President Joe Biden and dozens of major American companies have weighed in on the side of the universities.
"A blanket ban on race-conscious admissions would cause racial diversity to plummet at many of our nation's leading educational institutions," US Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar told the court.
Previous courts have upheld affirmative action -- in 2016 by a single vote -- but the policy has been controversial from the start, and a number of white students have mounted legal challenges over the years, claiming "reverse discrimination."
Nine states have banned affirmative action at public universities including California, where voters did so in a ballot proposition in 1996 and rebuffed an attempt to revive the policy in 2020.
In a 1978 decision -- Regents of the University of California v. Bakke -- the Supreme Court banned the use of quotas in university admissions as unconstitutional.
But the court said race or ethnic origin can be considered as one factor among others in admitting students to ensure a diverse student body and to combat previous discrimination that could have prevented marginalized students from being accepted to those schools.
Ketanji Brown Jackson, the first Black woman on the Supreme Court, sat out the Harvard case because she has served previously on the Board of Overseers at the school.
J.Bergmann--BTB