Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/22pdf/20-1199_l6gn.pdf
Page Number: 33.0

Cite as:  600 U. S. ____ (2023) 

25 

Opinion of the Court 

F. Supp. 3d,  at  137,  178;  3  App.  in  No.  20–1199,  at  1278,
1280–1283; 3 App. in No. 21–707, at 1234–1241.  It is far 
from evident, though, how assigning students to these ra-
cial categories and making admissions decisions based on
them furthers the educational benefits that the universities 
claim to pursue.

For starters, the categories are themselves imprecise in 
many ways.  Some of them are plainly overbroad: by group-
ing  together  all  Asian  students,  for  instance,  respondents
are  apparently  uninterested  in  whether  South  Asian  or 
East Asian students are adequately represented, so long as
there is enough of one to compensate for a lack of the other. 
Meanwhile other racial categories, such as “Hispanic,” are
arbitrary or undefined.  See, e.g., M. Lopez, J. Krogstad, & 
J. Passel, Pew Research Center, Who is Hispanic? (Sept. 15,
2022) (referencing the “long history of changing labels [and] 
shifting categories . . . reflect[ing] evolving cultural norms
about what it means to be Hispanic or Latino in the U. S.
today”).  And  still  other  categories  are  underinclusive.
When  asked  at  oral  argument  “how  are  applicants  from
Middle Eastern countries classified, [such as] Jordan, Iraq,
Iran,  [and]  Egypt,”  UNC’s  counsel  responded,  “[I]  do  not 
know  the  answer  to  that  question.”    Tr.  of  Oral  Arg.  in 
No.  21–707,  p.  107;  cf.  post,  at  6–7  (GORSUCH,  J.,  concur-
ring)  (detailing  the  “incoherent”  and  “irrational  stereo-
types” that these racial categories further).

Indeed, the use of these opaque racial categories under-
mines, instead of promotes, respondents’ goals.  By focusing
on  underrepresentation,  respondents  would  apparently
prefer a class with 15% of students from Mexico over a class
with  10%  of  students  from  several  Latin  American  coun-
tries,  simply  because  the  former  contains  more  Hispanic
students  than  the  latter.    Yet  “[i]t  is  hard  to  understand 
how a plan that could allow these results can be viewed as
being concerned with achieving enrollment that is ‘broadly