When the U.S. Supreme Court ended the use of affirmative action in college admissions today, the news hit America’s campuses hard. At Pace University, where I’m president, nearly half of our undergraduates identify as students of color. About one in six is the first in their family to attend college. Because we are not among the sliver of American universities labeled “highly selective,” we do not need to use race-conscious admissions to achieve that kind of diversity. Our students are proud to be part of a generation of Americans who look and think differently than those who have come before.
But as our students have watched opinions from this court overturn or call into question matters their generation thought settled, matters fundamental to how they view themselves and how they thought their country viewed them, they’ve felt increasingly uncomfortable. It’s why nearly two-thirds of Americans under 30 hold an unfavorable view of the Supreme Court, according to a Pew survey last fall.
The court’s decision comes as a personal blow to me, too. Two decades ago, when I served as vice president and general counsel at the University of Michigan, I helped lead the defense of admissions policies there that led to the landmark decision in Grutter v. Bollinger upholding the constitutionality of race-conscious admissions policies, properly tailored, and recognizing for the first time student body diversity as a compelling state interest.
And so, like my Pace students, I find myself disappointed, sad, and thrown off balance. But as I think about how to counsel our students, I also start to see a path forward for the causes of equality and respect for all people in our increasingly diverse society.
As disappointing as this decision is, I am reminded that nothing stays the same, especially on major policy issues. The precedent overturned yesterday has stood since the Bakke decision in 1978, but it has been constantly refined over that time. Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, in her 2003 Grutter opinion, noted she hoped in 25 years’ time affirmative action would no longer be necessary if these trends continued. We knew this day could come, if perhaps not so soon, and we must remember that we cannot allow ourselves to rely on past successes.
Grutter fundamentally changed the conversation. The key to our strategy was arguing that the Michigan Law School’s efforts to achieve a diverse student body were beneficial not just for the affected students but for society at large. Amicus briefs were filed by military, business, and education leaders supporting our position. The court was convinced. “In order to cultivate a set of leaders with legitimacy in the eyes of the citizenry, it is necessary that the path to leadership be visibly open to talented and qualified individuals of every race and ethnicity,” O’Connor wrote for the court.
Today, that viewpoint is commonplace. And regardless of the latest court decision, the major institutions of American society now recognize the importance of diversity in remaining competitive, effective, and legitimate. Employers will continue to seek diverse talent. The military will still seek a diverse officer corps. And colleges and universities will experiment with new ways to ensure their student bodies remain diverse.
Indeed (and this is the final point I will make to my students), those who believe in progress and equality must see this new ruling not as cause for despair but as a catalyst for innovation and action.
Our country is becoming only more diverse. Future generations of college students will be less white, and less privileged. As a nation, our priority must now be ensuring that our public K-12 system, in all communities, can produce highly qualified graduates, so that all excellent students have a shot at whatever college they dream of attending–and are prepared for the careers that come after.
The business sector has a key role to play in making the talent pipeline robust. Businesses of all sizes must build connections not only with colleges and universities but also with primary and secondary schools to help them produce college-ready students, whether through investments, internship opportunities, or mentorship. They must help with curricular development and perhaps even financial support. And they must broaden the scope of schools they recruit from, to ensure they are bringing in employees from all backgrounds.
At the same time, other institutions in society will have to pitch in, with government leading the way. Colleges and universities, which will remain committed to diverse campuses and classrooms, must partner with their local public schools and engage in bold experimentation to find new ways of achieving that goal. And our current students, so eager to help make change, can and should be partners in those experiments.
Whatever the court says, I have no doubt that history is on the side of those who believe that diversity is America’s great strength. Now is our opportunity to renew that promise.
Marvin Krislov is the president of Pace University in New York. He was vice president and general counsel of the University of Michigan from 1998 to 2007.
The opinions expressed in Fortune.com commentary pieces are solely the views of their authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and beliefs of Fortune.
More must-read commentary published by Fortune:
- The forced return to the office is the definition of insanity
- Speculative headlines about artificial intelligence are missing the point. Here’s what America’s top CEOs told us they intend to use A.I. for
- America’s education system is failing–but a growing school choice movement believes it has the solution
- A year after Roe v. Wade was overturned, an unworkable patchwork of state laws leaves corporate America more vulnerable to government overreach
