Skip to content
ADVERTISEMENT
Sign In
  • Sections
    • News
    • Advice
    • The Review
  • Topics
    • Data
    • Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion
    • Finance & Operations
    • International
    • Leadership & Governance
    • Teaching & Learning
    • Scholarship & Research
    • Student Success
    • Technology
    • Transitions
    • The Workplace
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Special Issues
    • Podcast: College Matters from The Chronicle
  • Newsletters
  • Virtual Events
  • Ask Chron
  • Store
    • Featured Products
    • Reports
    • Data
    • Collections
    • Back Issues
  • Jobs
    • Find a Job
    • Post a Job
    • Professional Development
    • Career Resources
    • Virtual Career Fair
  • More
  • Sections
    • News
    • Advice
    • The Review
  • Topics
    • Data
    • Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion
    • Finance & Operations
    • International
    • Leadership & Governance
    • Teaching & Learning
    • Scholarship & Research
    • Student Success
    • Technology
    • Transitions
    • The Workplace
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Special Issues
    • Podcast: College Matters from The Chronicle
  • Newsletters
  • Virtual Events
  • Ask Chron
  • Store
    • Featured Products
    • Reports
    • Data
    • Collections
    • Back Issues
  • Jobs
    • Find a Job
    • Post a Job
    • Professional Development
    • Career Resources
    • Virtual Career Fair
    Upcoming Events:
    An AI-Driven Work Force
    AI and Microcredentials
Sign In
'Distinct Interests'

The Supreme Court’s Ruling on Admissions Exempts Military Academies. What’s Up With That?

By Nell Gluckman June 30, 2023
Navy Midshipmen salute during the national anthem at the U.S. Naval Academy graduation in 2021.
Navy midshipmen salute during the national anthem at the U.S. Naval Academy graduation in 2021.Kevin Dietsch, Getty Images

The U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling against Harvard University and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill on Thursday delivered a tremendous blow to race-conscious admissions policies — policies that selective colleges say have been a cornerstone of their efforts to bring racial diversity to their student bodies. But the court made an exception for one type of institution: military academies.

The carveout was written in small print as a footnote at the bottom of the 30th page of Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr.’s 40-page opinion.

To continue reading for FREE, please sign in.

Sign In

Or subscribe now to read with unlimited access for as low as $10/month.

Don’t have an account? Sign up now.

A free account provides you access to a limited number of free articles each month, plus newsletters, job postings, salary data, and exclusive store discounts.

Sign Up

The U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling against Harvard University and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill on Thursday delivered a tremendous blow to race-conscious admissions policies — policies that selective colleges say have been a cornerstone of their efforts to bring racial diversity to their student bodies. But the court made an exception for one type of institution: military academies.

The carveout was written in small print as a footnote at the bottom of the 30th page of Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr.’s 40-page opinion.

The United States government, he wrote, “contends that race-based admissions programs further compelling interests at our nation’s military academies. No military academy is a party to these cases, however, and none of the courts below addressed the propriety of race-based admissions systems in that context. This opinion also does not address the issue, in light of the potentially distinct interests that military academies may present.”

Potentially distinct interests. Roberts did not spell those out, adding a layer of complexity to the ruling that colleges across the country are now trying to parse and interpret.

To the dissenting justices, the footnote was another weakness in the majority’s argument that race-conscious admissions policies violate the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause.

“The court has come to rest on the bottom-line conclusion,” wrote Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson in one of two dissenting opinions, “that racial diversity in higher education is only worth potentially preserving insofar as it might be needed to prepare Black Americans and other underrepresented minorities for success in the bunker, not the boardroom.”

“To the extent the court suggests national security interests are ‘distinct,’” Justice Sonia M. Sotomayor wrote in the other dissent, “those interests cannot explain the court’s narrow exemption, as national security interests are also implicated at civilian universities.”

She noted that Roberts justified this carveout in part by saying that military academies were not parties in these cases. But neither, Sotomayor pointed out, were many other kinds of institutions, including religious ones, that did not receive similar exemptions.

Puzzlement — and a Sliver of Hope

Some higher-education scholars were left scratching their heads about how to interpret the footnote.

ADVERTISEMENT

“It is not obvious to me why these institutions are treated differently,” Dominique J. Baker, an associate professor of education policy at Southern Methodist University, wrote in an email. “What are their interests that may be different than any other occupation in the United States that allows for them to need race-conscious admissions?”

Liliana Garces, a legal scholar and professor of higher education at the University of Texas at Austin, said she also struggled to make sense of it. She echoed the dissenting justices’ argument that if the military is able to use this practice, why not institutions that prepare students for professions in health care or business?

“It really shows the mental gymnastics needed for the court to overrule 45 years of precedent,” Garces said.

Kimberly West-Faulcon, a law professor at Loyola Marymount University, saw the carveout as a potential opening for colleges. The majority may have ruled against colleges’ diversity-based argument for race-conscious admissions — that a racially diverse class is necessary for colleges to achieve their education goals — but national security interests for race-conscious admission might still stand.

It really shows the mental gymnastics needed for the court to overrule 45 years of precedent.

“I read this case as cause for universities to review their admissions policies, conduct disparity studies, and be prepared to legally defend race affirmative action as justified by an assortment of compelling purposes,” she said in an email. National security may be one of those purposes.

In a friend-of-the-court brief filed in this case, 35 former military leaders argued that race-conscious admissions are crucial to their institutions’ decadeslong effort to diversify their officer class.

What to Know About Race-Conscious Admissions

race-conscious-admissions-new-promo-square.jpg

In two closely watched cases, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled unconstitutional the consideration of race in admissions. Here’s a primer.

Federal courts have long deferred to the professional judgment of the military, said Ty Seidule, a visiting professor of history at Hamilton College, in New York. Roberts’s carveout may be a continuation of that practice.

In their brief, the former military leaders wrote that the importance of maintaining a diverse officer corps has been settled for decades.

ADVERTISEMENT

“History has shown that placing a diverse armed forces under the command of homogenous leadership is a recipe for internal resentment, discord, and violence,” they wrote. “By contrast, units that are diverse across all levels are more cohesive, collaborative, and effective.”

Even after the military was desegregated in 1954, the officer corps remained almost entirely white. During the Vietnam War, the brief said, there were “widespread instances of racial tensions, disruptions, and violence.” After the war, the military embarked on an effort to change the demographics of its leadership, using “race-conscious affirmative action.”

The effort is ongoing, but according to the brief, the military has made progress since the Vietnam War. In 2020, it said, roughly nine percent of the officer corps was African American. The portion of Black officers in the Marines and Air Force was smaller: 5.7 percent and 6.3 percent, respectively. At that time, there were 1.3 million active-duty soldiers, of which roughly 17.2 percent identified as African American.

The former military leaders said there is still work to be done. For one of the brief’s signatories, Gen. Thomas P. Bostick, that was clear when he returned to the United States Military Academy at West Point, his alma mater, in 2013 after he had become commanding general of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

ADVERTISEMENT

When he graduated in 1978, Bostick was the only Black cadet to go into the Army Corps of Engineers, he said. Now, looking at the group of more than 100 cadets who chose the same path, he saw only two Black cadets.

“We grow leaders,” Bostick said of the army. Referring to the Reserve Officers’ Training Corps, or ROTC, he added: “You start with what you get out of ROTC and West Point. If your start lacks diversity, then you’ve got a long road.”

Bostick noted that even more officers come from ROTC programs than they do from military academies. While he was glad the ruling created a carveout for military academies, he worried about the ruling’s effect on that program.

Read other items in What to Know About Race-Conscious Admissions.
We welcome your thoughts and questions about this article. Please email the editors or submit a letter for publication.
Tags
Admissions & Enrollment Race
Share
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Facebook
  • Email
Gluckman_Nell.jpg
About the Author
Nell Gluckman
Nell Gluckman is a senior reporter who writes about research, ethics, funding issues, affirmative action, and other higher-education topics. You can follow her on Twitter @nellgluckman, or email her at nell.gluckman@chronicle.com.
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT

More News

Photo illustration showing Santa Ono seated, places small in the corner of a dark space
'Unrelentingly Sad'
Santa Ono Wanted a Presidency. He Became a Pariah.
Illustration of a rushing crowd carrying HSI letters
Seeking precedent
Funding for Hispanic-Serving Institutions Is Discriminatory and Unconstitutional, Lawsuit Argues
Photo-based illustration of scissors cutting through paper that is a photo of an idyllic liberal arts college campus on one side and money on the other
Finance
Small Colleges Are Banding Together Against a Higher Endowment Tax. This Is Why.
Pano Kanelos, founding president of the U. of Austin.
Q&A
One Year In, What Has ‘the Anti-Harvard’ University Accomplished?

From The Review

Photo- and type-based illustration depicting the acronym AAUP with the second A as the arrow of a compass and facing not north but southeast.
The Review | Essay
The Unraveling of the AAUP
By Matthew W. Finkin
Photo-based illustration of the Capitol building dome propped on a stick attached to a string, like a trap.
The Review | Opinion
Colleges Can’t Trust the Federal Government. What Now?
By Brian Rosenberg
Illustration of an unequal sign in black on a white background
The Review | Essay
What Is Replacing DEI? Racism.
By Richard Amesbury

Upcoming Events

Plain_Acuity_DurableSkills_VF.png
Why Employers Value ‘Durable’ Skills
Warwick_Leadership_Javi.png
University Transformation: a Global Leadership Perspective
  • Explore Content
    • Latest News
    • Newsletters
    • Letters
    • Free Reports and Guides
    • Professional Development
    • Virtual Events
    • Chronicle Store
    • Chronicle Intelligence
    • Jobs in Higher Education
    • Post a Job
  • Know The Chronicle
    • About Us
    • Vision, Mission, Values
    • DEI at The Chronicle
    • Write for Us
    • Work at The Chronicle
    • Our Reporting Process
    • Advertise With Us
    • Brand Studio
    • Accessibility Statement
  • Account and Access
    • Manage Your Account
    • Manage Newsletters
    • Individual Subscriptions
    • Group and Institutional Access
    • Subscription & Account FAQ
  • Get Support
    • Contact Us
    • Reprints & Permissions
    • User Agreement
    • Terms and Conditions
    • Privacy Policy
    • California Privacy Policy
    • Do Not Sell My Personal Information
1255 23rd Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20037
© 2025 The Chronicle of Higher Education
The Chronicle of Higher Education is academe’s most trusted resource for independent journalism, career development, and forward-looking intelligence. Our readers lead, teach, learn, and innovate with insights from The Chronicle.
Follow Us
  • twitter
  • instagram
  • youtube
  • facebook
  • linkedin