Longtime opponents of affirmative action are celebrating the recent decision by the Republican-appointed majority on the Supreme Court, which struck down affirmative action at American colleges and universities. Despite this setback — which will undermine admissions procedures used by many higher education institutions — admissions offices are expected to continue looking at other ways to promote diversity.

In the meantime, right-wing media outlets have responded by praising the Supreme Court’s decision while falsely accusing colleges of having used affirmative action to impose racial “quotas” on their student bodies. Moreover, the ongoing right-wing barrage also portends further attacks on student diversity itself.

Conservatives are claiming that the Supreme Court just struck down racial “quotas” — which already happened 45 years ago

At the heart of this right-wing misinformation is a continued false use of terminology about so-called racial “quotas.” In fact, racial quotas have been unconstitutional since 1978, when the Supreme Court ruled against them in the case Regents of the University of California v. Bakke. That case also acknowledged that schools had a “compelling interest” in promoting student diversity, which permitted schools to use race as one factor of many in considering an application.

Both Harvard and the other school involved in last week’s case, the University of North Carolina, testified that race was only one factor in an admission system without quotas, and that striking down the existing systems would harm enrollment of students from underrepresented groups.

In this latest case, the Supreme Court essentially ruled that all consideration of race in higher admissions is unconstitutional, eviscerating decades of precedent which allowed race to be included among the factors considered in the college admissions process and seriously complicating efforts to build up diversity in higher education.

Mildred García, president of the American Association of State Colleges and Universities, said in a statement that the court’s decision “will have negative consequences for all Americans and diminish our society’s economic and social development,” further adding, “We must not lose the important ground that has been gained. We must not revert to an inequitable society.”

• Fox News host Jesse Watters claimed, “The court didn't strike down diversity, it struck down discrimination. The court merely said the Constitution doesn't allow racial quotas in admissions.” Watters continued: “The real issue is, why have African Americans not achieved on average, comparatively, a higher level of academic success? Now, the answer isn't found in the court system. The public school system in this country is a disaster, especially for African Americans. And there should be a reckoning. Now ultimately, the value of a good education is instilled by parents in the home. And obviously, poverty plays a role.” [Fox News, Jesse Watters Primetime, 6/29/23]
• Former federal prosecutor Doug Burns said addressing past discrimination should not mean “specific quotas.” “Well, Chief Justice [John] Roberts has been very clear for many, many years that he does not believe that you should address racial discrimination with more discrimination, in this case in reverse. And he's made it clear that there should be other ways to try to address the problem of past discrimination Other than setting things like, you know, specific quotas, specific boxes being checked.” [Newsmax, The National Report, 6/29/23]
• Newsmax host Eric Bolling claimed, “Meritocracy matters in America, more than filling quotas does.” “Eliminating racial discrimination means eliminating all of it, a glimmer of hope that meritocracy matters in America, more than filling quotas does. Today, by a vote of 6 to 3, the Supreme Court ruled that university admissions programs using affirmative action and other race-based admissions criteria are unconstitutional. The ruling says that a student must be treated based on his or her experiences as an individual, not on the basis of race. Kudos to that. The Supreme Court ruled against affirmative action because, in fact, it is systemically racist.” [Newsmax, Eric Bolling The Balance, 6/29/23]
• Turning Point USA’s Charlie Kirk claimed that “a Black kid that decides not to do homework” was given “a group quota preference.” “If there is a Black kid that decides not to do homework, and he's in the 40th percentile, why should he be given a preference? Why should he be given a group quota preference as a preferential group? ... The incentives are then you have this massive DEI machinery that is very, very difficult to disentangle.” [Real America’s Voice, The Charlie Kirk Show, 6/29/23]
• While celebrating the end of affirmative action, Benny Johnson called the policy “Nazi-level thinking.” “These leftists, these libs, they really do have, like, Nazi-level thinking here. The racial quotas, the — I — it's like eugenics-thinking. It's so backwards.” [The Benny Show, 6/29/23] 
• Fox host Mark Levin claimed that “racial quotas” were “what we had until today.” “Race, racial quotas in medical school admissions, this is what we had until today. Discrimination against Asian Americans seeking entry into Harvard, segregating college dorm rooms and graduation ceremonies, dumbing down school curricula, sabotaging merit scholarship programs, issuing presidential executive orders that, for instance, exclude white farmers and other privileged racial groups.” [Westwood One, The Mark Levin Show, 6/29/23]
• Former Acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker: SCOTUS said “what you can’t do is categorically make quotas.” “I think at the end of the day what this opinion really says, is that you just can't depend on someone checking a box and then you know, trying to make your categorical decisions based on that box-checking. You have to look behind, you know, the person and their experience. And, you know, maybe their race has uniquely impacted them, and then you can take that under consideration. But what you can't do is categorically make quotas, categorically hire people just based on what box they check.” [Newsmax, Wake Up America, 7/3/23]

Conservatives are trying to drive a wedge between Asian American students and other minority groups

Right-wing media have attempted to use the recent case as a wedge between Asian American students, versus Black and Hispanic students. The central claim is that the numbers of Asian students has been limited, supposedly shutting out worthy applicants in favor of lesser students from other minority groups. All of these arguments are built on a false premise: Harvard had already admitted a record number of Asian American students while other minority enrollment had dropped. Simply put, the wedge issue isn’t real in the first place.

• Newsmax co-host Emma Rechenberg claimed that Asian American students saw admissions “go to someone of a different race” due to quotas. “If you looked into the lawsuit, initially, there were a number of Asian students who felt like they had a less chance of getting in despite their qualifications, the fact that that quota had already been hit, it was going to go to someone of a different race. The Supreme Court ruling that is unconstitutional.” [Newsmax, The National Report, 6/29/23] 
• Newsmax legal analyst Alan Dershowitz claimed that Harvard used a quota, with “a ceiling for Asian Americans” and “a floor for African Americans.” “So, race is no longer to be a factor. Whether they can still make it a factor, and still impose the same quotas — remember the Supreme Court basically said that Harvard has a quota system. It gave the statistics, every year, the number of African Americans is almost identical, the number of Asian Americans who are discriminated against is almost entirely the same. Harvard had two quotas — a ceiling, a ceiling for Asian Americans, and a floor, a floor for African Americans. That’s not the American way.” [Newsmax, The Record with Greta Van Sustern, 6/29/23] 
• Color Us United’s Christian Watson said that Asian students have been “displaced” by quotas. “If you look at those who are actually adversely impacted by affirmative action, number one, it's Asian students. There have been stories around the nation of Asian students being told by their school counselors, by their friends, by their family members not to apply for high-ranking schools they would normally be a shoo-in for, because affirmative action and quotas have displaced them.” [Newsmax, Sunday Report, 7/2/23]

Conservatives conflate all diversity efforts with “quotas” and pledge further legal action

The right-wing media responses to the decision have also foreshadowed future legal challenges to diversity efforts. Conservative commentators are now signaling that diversity initiatives in general are the next target, and have called for conservative-backed litigants to target schools for merely keeping statistics on student body demographics. Other commentators have made calls to target diversity and equity in hiring, again conflating diversity initiatives in the private sector with “quotas.”

• Turning Point USA’s Charlie Kirk called to “crack the whip on affirmative action,” have Republican-led states ban schools from “collecting any racial information at all.” “Now, this could have imposed tougher rules to really crack the whip on affirmative action. It could say that, quote, schools will always twist race to impose racial discrimination, so they just can’t collect racial information at all. By the way, that’s what every red state needs to do right now. Kansas, Texas, they need to pass rules that we’re not collecting any racial information at all. Period.” [Real America’s Voice, The Charlie Kirk Show, 6/29/23]
• Former Trump administration official Roger Severino said further lawsuits will target colleges if they “count the numbers” of students, allegedly proving an “effective quota system.” “Now, the Biden administration, I have no doubt they will do nothing with this decision, in fact, they are probably going to resist it as much as possible. Harvard has already signaled that in their view, to count as a diverse student body, you need to have a effective quota system. And if they start counting, they're gonna open themselves up to a lawsuit. Right? We will know over time just how bad discrimination is, because more lawsuits will be able to come, and through the depositions they’ll put the administrators on the stand, effectively, and say, ‘Did you actually count the numbers?’ And if the answer is yes, they are in serious trouble when it comes to race.” [Premiere Radio Networks, The Sean Hannity Show, 6/29/23]
• Dershowitz said activist groups will “watch the universities” as they try to “keep the numbers up” on minority enrollment. “Already, even before the decision came down, a number of prominent professors said, oh, Harvard’s smart enough to figure out a way of not reducing the number of African American admitted students by — without failing to comply with the Supreme Court. So, it's going to be a challenge, and groups are going to watch the universities to see whether they’re really complying with the Supreme Court decision, or whether they're trying to circumvent it. You know, the Supreme Court pointed out, it was absolutely correct, that Harvard and other places has quotas — they didn't use the word quotas, but a fixed number of students from every race that have to be admitted. If the number of African American students at Harvard would go down, say from 11% or 12%, to 5 or 6%, there’d be protests and there'd be hell to pay. And so, I think Harvard will try to do whatever it can to keep the numbers up.” [Newsmax, Eric Bolling The Balance, 6/29/23]
• The Federalist editor-at-large Benjamin Weingarten said that outlawing “quotas” would also be “the death knell of their quote-unquote ‘equity agenda.’” “If you follow this opinion to its logical conclusion, and you assume that every single influential institution actually ought to judge people on their merits and not try to create quotas and hit certain numbers and proportion to the skin pigmentation of people in America, it's the death knell of their quote-unquote ‘equity agenda.’ And it's an American agenda, which treats us as the individuals that we are, the individuals who are supposed to be protected under the law, not by dint of the skin color, but by dint of we're all Americans, we're all human beings, these are the skills, capabilities, and ambitions that we bring to the table.” [Newsmax, Wake Up America, 6/30/23]
• Fox Business senior correspondent Charlie Gasparino said that in corporate America, “DEI practices have devolved into something like quotas.” “But because DEI practices have devolved into something like quotas, and that's what we have at major companies, quotas, and I'm getting examples at major banks and big companies where it's not just the notion of diversity — which is a good notion, let's have a diverse workforce. It's not just that. It's like, you will have certain amount of Black employees, white males may not get this promotion, we need that promotion for a white female or however you look at it.” [Fox News, Fox & Friends, 7/3/23]
• Newsmax contributor Betsy McCaughey: “DEI programs … set quotas for hiring or promotion based on race.” “Attorneys and in-house counsel all across the country are already warning companies that these DEI programs that set quotas for hiring or promotion based on race, that have affinity groups that otherwise treat different employees or applicants differently based on race   — they're gonna be thrown out, illegal.” [Newsmax, Wake Up America, 7/3/23]
• Fox host Will Cain: Universities “gulped down racial preferences and shadow quotas” for diversity. “If the goal of affirmative action is diversity, what is diversity? Define diversity. Is it 10% Black, 20% Black, 50%? Is it 10% Asian, 50% Asian? … So don't think the university system will just give up racism. The entire enterprise has gulped down racial preferences and shadow quotas, and gulped it down with such vigor that it's as if it's been swallowed up by David Duke.” [Fox News, Fox News Tonight, 7/3/29]