Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/22pdf/20-1199_l6gn.pdf
Page Number: 48.0

40  STUDENTS FOR FAIR ADMISSIONS, INC. v. PRESIDENT 

AND FELLOWS OF HARVARD COLLEGE 
Opinion of the Court 

not  the  name.”  Cummings  v.  Missouri,  4  Wall.  277,  325 
(1867).  A benefit to a student who overcame racial discrim-
ination, for example, must be tied to that student’s courage
and determination.  Or a benefit to a student whose herit-
age or culture motivated him or her to assume a leadership 
role or attain a particular goal must be tied to that student’s 
unique  ability  to  contribute  to  the  university.    In  other 
words, the student must be treated based on his or her ex-
periences as an individual—not on the basis of race. 

Many universities have for too long done just the oppo-
site.  And in doing so, they have concluded, wrongly, that
the touchstone of an individual’s identity is not challenges
bested, skills built, or lessons learned but the color of their 
skin.  Our  constitutional  history  does  not  tolerate  that 
choice. 

The judgments of the Court of Appeals for the First Cir-
cuit  and  of  the  District  Court  for  the  Middle  District  of 
North Carolina are reversed. 

It is so ordered.

 JUSTICE JACKSON took no part in the consideration or de-

cision of the case in No. 20–1199.