Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/22pdf/20-1199_l6gn.pdf
Page Number: 226.0

18  STUDENTS FOR FAIR ADMISSIONS, INC. v. PRESIDENT 

AND FELLOWS OF HARVARD COLLEGE 
JACKSON, J., dissenting 

A plus, by its nature, can certainly matter to an admis-
sions  case.    But  make  no  mistake:  When  an  applicant 
chooses to disclose his or her race, UNC treats that aspect
of identity on par with other aspects of applicants’ identity
that affect who they are (just like, say, where one grew up, 
or medical challenges one has faced).89  And race is consid-
ered alongside any other factor that sheds light on what at-
tributes  applicants  will  bring  to  the  campus  and  whether 
they are likely to excel once there.90  A reader of today’s ma-
jority opinion could be forgiven for misunderstanding how 
UNC’s  program  really  works,  or  for  missing  that,  under
UNC’s  holistic  review  process,  a  White  student  could  re-
ceive a diversity plus while a Black student might not.91 

UNC does not do all this to provide handouts to either 
John or James.  It does this to ascertain who among its tens 

—————— 

89 2 App. 706, 708; 3 id., at 1415–1416. 
90 2 id., at 706, 708; 3 id., at 1415–1416. 
91 A  reader  might  miss  this  because  the  majority  does  not  bother  to 
drill down on how UNC’s holistic admissions process operates.  Perhaps
that  explains  its  failure  to  apprehend  (by  reviewing  the  evidence  pre-
sented  at  trial)  that  everyone,  no  matter  their  race,  is  eligible  for  a 
diversity-linked plus.  Compare ante, at 5, and n. 1, with 3 App. 1416, 
and supra, at 17.  The majority also repeatedly mischaracterizes UNC’s
holistic admissions-review process as a “race-based admissions system,”
and insists that UNC’s program involves “separating students on the ba-
sis of race” and “pick[ing only certain] races to benefit.”  Ante, at 5, and 
n. 1, 26, 38.  These claims would be concerning if they had any basis in 
the record.  The majority appears to have misunderstood (or categorically 
rejected) the established fact that UNC treats race as merely one of the 
many aspects  of an applicant that, in the  real world, matter to under-
standing the whole person.  Moreover, its holistic review process involves
reviewing a wide variety of personal criteria, not just race.  Every appli-
cant competes against thousands of other applicants, each of whom has 
personal qualities that are taken into account and that other applicants
do not—and could not—have.  Thus, the elimination of the race-linked 
plus would still leave SFFA’s members competing against thousands of
other applicants to UNC, each of whom has potentially plus-conferring 
qualities that a given SFFA member does not.