Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/22pdf/20-1199_hgdj.pdf
Page Number: 135

4 

STUDENTS FOR FAIR ADMISSIONS, INC. v. PRESIDENT 
AND FELLOWS OF HARVARD COLLEGE 
KAVANAUGH, J., concurring 

equal  opportunity  will  make  it  safe  to  sunset 
affirmative action.”  Id., at 346 (concurring opinion). 

In  allowing  race-based  affirmative  action  in  higher
education  for  another  generation—and  only  for  another
generation—the  Court  in  Grutter  took  into  account 
competing  considerations.  The  Court  recognized  the 
barriers that some minority applicants to universities still 
faced as of 2003, notwithstanding the progress made since 
Bakke.  See Grutter, 539 U. S., at 343.  The Court stressed, 
however,  that  “there  are  serious  problems  of  justice
connected  with  the  idea  of  preference  itself.”  Id.,  at  341 
(internal quotation marks omitted).  And the Court added 
that a “core purpose of the Fourteenth Amendment was to
do  away  with  all  governmentally  imposed  discrimination 
based on race.”  Ibid. (internal quotation marks omitted).

The Grutter Court also emphasized the equal protection
principle  that  racial  classifications,  even  when  otherwise 
permissible, must be a “ ‘temporary matter,’ ”  and “must be 
limited in time.”  Id., at 342 (quoting Croson, 488 U. S., at 
510 (plurality opinion of O’Connor, J.)).  The requirement of
a  time  limit  “reflects  that  racial  classifications,  however 
compelling  their  goals,  are  potentially  so  dangerous  that 
they  may  be  employed  no  more  broadly  than  the  interest
demands.  Enshrining a permanent justification for racial
preferences would offend this fundamental equal protection 
principle.”  Grutter, 539 U. S., at 342.   
  Importantly, the Grutter Court saw “no reason to exempt
race-conscious admissions programs from the requirement 
that all governmental use of race must have a logical end 
point.”  Ibid.  The  Court  reasoned  that  the  “requirement
that  all  race-conscious  admissions  programs  have  a 
termination  point  assures  all  citizens  that  the  deviation
from  the  norm  of  equal  treatment  of  all  racial  and  ethnic 
groups  is  a  temporary  matter,  a  measure  taken  in  the 
service  of  the  goal  of  equality  itself.”    Ibid.  (internal