The Latest Breaking News from UNC

Achieving this goal will require a lot more than banning racial preferences in college admissions. That includes some measures that will make the political right uncomfortable, as well as the left.

Justice Sotomayor decides who is a person of color based on whether it supports her views regarding structural racism.

Justice Jackson demonstrates why the usual recusal rules will not work for the Supreme Court.

I've known Michael Rosman at the Center for Individual Rights for almost 30 years; he has litigated many important cases, including with regard to racial preferences, and was one of the lawyers in Grutter v. Bollinger. I'm therefore delighted to pass along his short reactions to Students for Fair Admission…

A Kentucky man who testified in front of the nation’s high court on Affirmative Action is concerned about the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling Thursday that struck down programs at the University of North Carolina and Harvard.

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Supreme Court’s two Black justices sparred over the meaning and impact of race in dueling opinions on the majority’s decision to curtail affirmative action programs at universities.

In an anticipated but nonetheless stunning decision expected to have widespread implications on college campuses and workplaces across the country, the conservative majority of the U.S. Supreme Court on June 29, 2023, outlawed affirmative action programs that were designed to correct centuries of racist disenfranchisement in higher education.

A preliminary assessment of today's decisions. The majority rightly struck a blow against the use of racial preferences for purposes of advancing "diversity" in education. But there are some flaws in its reasoning.

There is no reason for public universities to grant preferential treatment to the scions of their alumni.