WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court has decided to hear a significant case concerning middle school admissions, particularly focusing on the role of race in these processes. This comes three years after the court made headlines by striking down affirmative action in college admissions.
The case centers around admissions to four selective middle schools in Montgomery County, Maryland, which is located near Washington, D.C. A group of parents has filed a lawsuit claiming that while the district’s admissions policy appears to be race-neutral, it is actually designed to favor Black and Latino students at the expense of Asian American students.
On Monday, the Supreme Court agreed to evaluate whether the parents have sufficient evidence to support their claims of discrimination. Previously, lower courts dismissed the case, arguing that Asian American students were not underrepresented at the magnet schools compared to the overall applicant pool. If the Supreme Court rules in favor of the parents, known as the Association for Education Fairness, it may allow the lawsuit to proceed.
The controversy traces back to a change in admissions policy that began about a decade ago. At that time, a consulting group was brought in to examine how the school district selected students for its middle school magnet programs. Following this review, the district revised its admissions policies to consider the poverty levels of the schools students attended. As a result, the proportion of Asian American students, who were largely concentrated in more affluent schools, saw a decline in admissions.
In 2020, the parent group filed their lawsuit. Shortly after, the school system, which serves over 150,000 students, altered its admissions practices to remove an additional in-person exam. Now, students qualify for a lottery based on their performance on standardized tests. However, students from more affluent schools (where many Asian American students are located) must score higher on these standardized tests to be eligible for the lottery.
The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the lower court’s dismissal, stating that the parents did not provide evidence showing that Asian American students were adversely affected, as they were still being admitted at rates higher than their overall application numbers. This ruling was influenced by a previous case involving a similar challenge against high school admissions in Virginia, where parents lost because Asian American students were still overrepresented among those admitted.
The Supreme Court will now consider whether a group claiming to be impacted by a race-neutral policy must demonstrate that they faced disproportionate harm to prove intentional discrimination. The attorneys representing the Montgomery County parents argue that merely comparing representation against the applicant pool is insufficient. They contend that other evidence of discrimination should also be evaluated.
“Under the applicant pool benchmark, the government can set specific racial targets, meet them, and evade scrutiny for discriminatory intent,” they stated in their appeal to the Supreme Court.
The school district has consistently defended its new admissions policy, called the Pandemic Plan due to its timing, arguing that it is indeed race-neutral.
“The Pandemic Plan is a colorblind lottery,” the district’s attorneys argued in a brief opposing the Supreme Court’s involvement. “There is nothing in the Pandemic Plan, its history, or its purpose that violates the Constitution.”
The Supreme Court is expected to hear arguments in the coming months, which could have significant implications for how schools across the country approach admissions and race.
