Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/22pdf/20-1199_hgdj.pdf
Page Number: 155.0

16  STUDENTS FOR FAIR ADMISSIONS, INC. v. PRESIDENT 

AND FELLOWS OF HARVARD COLLEGE 
SOTOMAYOR, J., dissenting 

U. S.,  at  313).  Racially  integrated  schools  improve  cross-
racial understanding, “break down racial stereotypes,” and
ensure that students obtain “the skills needed in today’s in-
creasingly  global  marketplace  . . .  through  exposure  to
widely diverse people, cultures, ideas, and viewpoints.”  539 
U. S., at 330.  More broadly, inclusive institutions that are
“visibly open to talented and qualified individuals of every 
race  and  ethnicity”  instill  public  confidence  in  the  “legiti-
macy” and “integrity” of those institutions and the diverse 
set  of  graduates  that  they  cultivate.  Id.,  at  332.    That  is 
particularly true in the context of higher education, where
colleges and universities play a critical role in “maintaining
the fabric of society” and serve as “the training ground for
a large number of our Nation’s leaders.”  Id., at 331–332.  It 
is thus an objective of the highest order, a “compelling in-
terest” indeed, that universities pursue the benefits of ra-
cial diversity and ensure that  “the diffusion of knowledge 
and opportunity” is available to students of all races.  Id., 
at 328–333. 

This  compelling  interest  in  student  body  diversity  is
grounded not only in the Court’s equal protection jurispru-
dence  but  also  in  principles  of  “academic  freedom,”  which
“ ‘long [have] been viewed as a special concern of the First 
Amendment.’ ”    Id.,  at  324  (quoting  Bakke,  438  U. S.,  at 
312).  In light of “the important purpose of public education 
and the expansive freedoms of speech and thought associ-
ated with the university environment,” this Court’s prece-
dents  recognize  the  imperative  nature  of  diverse  student 
bodies  on  American  college  campuses.    539  U. S.,  at  329. 
Consistent with the First Amendment, student body diver-
sity allows universities to promote “th[e] robust exchange
of ideas which discovers truth out of a multitude of tongues
[rather] than through any kind of authoritative selection. ” 
Bakke,  438  U. S.,  at  312  (internal  quotation  marks  omit-
ted).  Indeed, as the Court recently reaffirmed in another