WASHINGTON—A federal court dismissed SFFA v. UT-Austin, a lawsuit initiated in 2019 by Edward Blum and his anti-civil rights group Students for Fair Admissions (SFFA). The case initially challenged the University of Texas at Austin’s (UT-Austin) race-conscious college admissions policy aimed at fostering a diverse student body and subsequently targeted the University’s revised race-neutral admissions policy.
Following the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in SFFA v. Harvard/ UNC-Chapel Hill undermining the use of race in college admissions programs, UT-Austin eliminated the consideration of race in admissions, aiming to adhere to the newly established legal standards while continuing to foster diversity within its student body through race-neutral means. However, SFFA continued its litigation against UT-Austin, even after the policy shift, contending that the university’s new policy is unlawful, attempting to expand the scope of the Supreme Court ruling.
The ruling marks a defeat of SFFA’s efforts to broaden the implications of the Harvard decision, which set strict guidelines for considering race in college admissions. The decision also is a victory for advocates who continue to fight for diversity and equality on campus in the wake of the ruling. As the district court concluded, the Supreme Court in Harvard specifically noted that “nothing in [its] opinion should be construed as prohibiting universities from considering an applicant’s discussion of how race affected his or her life, be it through discrimination, inspiration, or otherwise.” Id. at 230.
The Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, together with pro bono co-counsel from Hunton Andrews Kurth, LLP, and Bernabei & Kabat, PLLC, represent a broad coalition of civil rights and student groups and individuals as defendant-intervenors and filed their motion to dismiss, and UT-Austin filed its own motion to dismiss. The diverse alliance of intervenors includes the Black Student Alliance, Texas Orange Jackets, Texas State Conference of the NAACP, and a wide-ranging group of UT-Austin students from Black, Asian American, Latinx, and white communities.
David Hinojosa, director of the Educational Opportunities Project at the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, lauded the victory against Edward Blum and SFFA, which has consistently positioned itself against civil rights advancements in school admission programs. “Despite their efforts to extend the Supreme Court’s Harvard ruling and aim to further diminish diversity on campuses, their strategy backfired,” Hinojosa remarked. “The Lawyers’ Committee, together with our partners, remain committed to defending students’ rights, promoting diversity and justice, and ensuring equal opportunities for all qualified students. We are undeterred by Blum’s attempts to compromise fairness and civil rights.”
Additional quotes will later be added in this online document
In both the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and Harvard cases, the Lawyers’ Committee and their respective co-counsel represented multiracial groups of students and alumni. As the sole civil rights organization involved from the start and the only one to present oral arguments at the Supreme Court, the Lawyers’ Committee has been a pivotal advocate for racial equity in higher education.
###
About the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law The Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization, formed in 1963 at the request of President John F. Kennedy to mobilize the nation’s leading lawyers as agents for change in the Civil Rights Movement. Today, the Lawyers’ Committee uses legal advocacy to achieve racial justice, fighting inside and outside the courts to ensure that Black people and other people of color have the voice, opportunity, and power to make the promises of our democracy real.
