Racial classifications are wrong. That principle was enshrined in our law at great cost following the civi war. A century of resistance to raise neutraty followed, but this courts landma decision in browfinally and firmly rejected the view that racial classifications have anyolto play in providing educational opportunities. Since then, the court has broadly enforced the prohibitn on the use of racial classifications. Whatever factors may use, skin color is not one of th. Rather is a exception to the rule. It should be overruled. Its view of diversity justify racial classifications contradicts the 14th amendments guarantee of equal treatment. It relied upon sarah typical assumptions that race is necessarily a proxy for os viewpoint and its purrted limits are empty and selfcontradtory, which is why even s simply ignores them. It also creates many negative effects. Some applicants are instant of eyes to conceal their race. Othe admitted on merit have their accomplishnts diminished by saying race played a role i their admission. In two decades, this has somehow reduced the role of race on campus. Relying on it. E is actually ecast its own demise and made clear that this must be diminishing over time, but this has not happened. U. S. Officials testified they cannot imagine any scenario that would actually lead them to end their racial preferences. Unc wants to use race in perpetuity. Racial classifications are wrong and this court should overrule it. Mr. Strawbridge, the respondents argue that if you nt consider race, you wont be able to consider the whole person in the admissions process. How do you respond to that . This court has always said that racia it is pe that race could providetext for experience, but just considering race and racene is not consistent with the constitution. It is alsoot consistent with other liic approaches that this court takes. There is great freedom, for but one thing you cannot strike them for is their most holistic process perhaps known to law is the best interest of the child. This court haselthat race cannot be a factor in that. I understand that. But ware talking about an applicatioto university. If you dont include race, i assume that respondent think at by including race, it tells you something abo aerson. If you dont include that, then what do you include on the applicat youncde their experiences, where they grew up perhaps their socioeconomic status. All sorts of thingsould actually lead to broader diversity. The viewpoint that ra necessarily inform something about anyones qualifications is antithetical to this courts process anconstitution. Can we stop a moment . I want to break down what youre talkout. Sometimes race does correlate to some experiences and not oers. If you are black, you are more likely to be in and under resourced school. You are more likely to be taught by teachers who are not as qualified oers. You armo likely to be viewed as having less academic potential. In your own arguments in your brief, you correlate race to lots of other things that are not necessarily causal, but which do correlate. How do you tease that out . You want an miions officer to say, i am not going to look at the race of thehi to see if they had all of those socioeconomic barriers present. Despite that, theyery High High School scores, may be a lot lowe scores, but i am going to think about that. U e asking them to just shrug that aside . It is always been disfavored for number of reasons. They are necessarily divisive. They carry stick medic harm. Stig maddock harm. Why is it that within just the 13th and 14 thmoments being passed, congress spent a lot of money in trying to black children, whether they were children of slaves or free slaves, to be ecad in integrated schools . They had a belief that integration itself could provide valu that is true. This is even in the educational context. That is oy remediation for slavery. These programs were made available to black free children, many of them. And the Kentucky School that was supported by federal funds required 50 black chi and 50 white children. I dont believe that supports that view. There was an appon to be open to all. They did not make distinction among applicants by race. The only requirement we could tell was the willingness to be integrated educated in an integrated environ you are assuming in your argument that re is the only faoro get someone in. Could you point to any application . You cannot use race exclusively, but you can use it as one many factors. Yesobviously we have quarrels with the lf that. In a zerosum game, if race is going to beed, that mean some people are going to g and others excluded based on not just the logic, the facts. What is the fact here about race ing used singularly to let people in . The experts at ud that one point 2 weruenced by race. Weusly had disagreements with theharacterization of that, but given the fact that they received 40,000 applications per year, that is hundreds if not thousands of applicants being affected by race every yea our experts testimony say there plications with eached admissions cycle. Your petition was based on race neutral alternatives. Younk those are appropriate, enf the intent of the state in adopting them is to reach a students . Evel of minority our position is that this court has an established framework to establish neutral action. If the only reason to adopt a particularsions policy is for racial diversity alone, [indiscernible] i suppose that given they are race neutral, most would not be defended as for race alone. For example, socioeconomic status, may be attendance at a particular school that is known to be correct. All of the alternatives, especially socioeconomic, those can be just on race neutral means. They increase socioeconomic diveit they ensure that people in under resourced schools have an opportunity to attend a university. Wire you questioning race alone . Usually, you look at permissible veusmpermissible purposes. It is constitutionally peissible if it is one thing alone. Ift one thing at all, itt affects governmental action. Suose there is a 10 plan or sothing like that and one part is socioeconomic derty. We will also get more ci diversity in this manner. That is part of the purpose of the law. I tnkhat is pretty true to experience, that pt of the reason that these kinds of plans have beeneveloped is that people have understood that we will work for more racially diverse campuses is that permissible . It is a different analysis when theacnations when the mechazaon chosen is andn iis not different analysis. E way you can offend the constitution is by using an impermissible classification. Another way you can offend the constitution is by devising a proxy mechanism with the purpose of achienghe same results that the impermissle classification would. I took your answer, which i welcome, to be yes, the 10 plans are constitutional. But i guess i wonder why, given most of our constitutional doctrine, that wou bso. Isure the current state of the laws, especial within arlington. If the government can demonstrey would have adopted the neutral program anyway, i dt think there would be intentional discrimination in the. So, if you prevail here, and iversity develops three raceneutral alternatives to consider in the wake of a cision here, and they choose the one that is going to ad to the highest number of africanamerican students and they choose that raceneutral alternative for that reason at were the only reason ere choosing it, i think that would require an analysis on what the evidence would have got to bear. What if it is one of the reasons . If they can demonstrate they wouldve pursued that policy anyway, i ink it is sufficient and on what you are sayings if that contributes at all to the deciaking, it is impermissible. I dont think that i what im saying. I am saying that if the only reason to do it is through the narrow lens of race and there is no other raceneutra would have led to adopt thatey policy anyway, i think that is the only scenario that wld create problems. Race has never been a dermative factor. Race alone does not account for why someone is admitted or not admitted there is always a coluce of reasons. There are a number of hispanics, blacks, native americans, who are not chosen by schools. I am not sure i undd how you are differentiating your answers. If race isnly one among many factors, how can you ever prove, given that the District Court foundgainst you, that it is ever a determinative factory . Deck factor . I dont think that was a it was proved that it was. Decisionsnd 0. 2 outofstate decisions. I would suggest that that is a flaw both in the District Courts reasoning and broader in general, in that it encourages and nullifies scrutiny in some ways, when you have this many factored analysis th makes it more difficult to see what efctracial bias. Can i just ask about that . I think we have to drill down on that from a threshold ictional standpoint. I think we have to understand whether race is being used in this context to give rise to an actual concrete particularized injury that woul give members of your organizati sg to challenge the use of race in thtext. I have been struggling to understand exactly the sort of how race is actually factoring into the admissions process here and whether there is any injury that arises. Can you help us hat, figuring out how exactly uncs systks in terms of race and how your members are being harmed by let me start with injury. Denial of an opportunity to fairly compete for admission 11 of the factors that is used is racial that was a setaside. It was a specific set of circumstances. You coulse there that the race factor was creating an ual Playing Field because of the way in which the program was structured. Here, i dont really see that happening, because first of the university is not requiring anybody to get there race at the begi when youyour race, you are not getting any special points. It is being treated on par with othefaors in the system. No one is automatically getting in because race is being used. There is no real work that it is doing separate and apart from the other factors in any different way, like it was in that case. When youin that case, it says specifically when there i a setaside kind of program, then we have actual injury that gives rise to standing. But i am not sure you have that here. Even another case establishes that the holistic process does no the injury go away. But you said that needs to go away, so we cannot use this as a basis. Race can only be used as a factor, never a minus factor paired but th are many dissenting opinions in that case. It makes no sense. Ife going to consider race and we that racial clcation, which is highly disfavored at law because ints nature the way it is going to be used, we take away some of the work. I dont think that is the way standing ordinarily works. I amed that you are asking standing rule, that you are saying that challenge the use of race as a factorut explaining how it is factoring innd how that harms our members. So why is it that race is doing ything different to your memberss ability to coin this environment . They can stay get extra points. The points are not bei tallied, there is no goal, there is ntaet. But in any event, they can get points for diversity in this ronment. So, why does having race as a factor harm your members in an addressable way . The case is that unc gives racial preferences to everyone applicants. Pplicants and asian you sure about that . Yes. I thought no one could get a point for diversity, to the extent that the other factors in their appln allowed for. Unc, and i think this is in the District Court finding defineshree groups that i said. Er, any effective race in the procesisoing to give rise to injury because the jury that one case recognize and another did not hesitate in fighting for standing in a case, is that youre being denied the opportunity tote on a fair Playing Field, at least a constitutional Playing Field. Cant ta it back to another question . She came she talked about a student wh from an underprivileged school, maybe did not score well on the sat. I want to know whether, in your view of the world, if a student wrote an ess dcribing some of the experiences that Justice Sotomayor said, racial prejudice, things that shapeho i am, in your view of the world, couldniversity take that the equal Protection Small . Ing yes. The active overcoming discriminationparate because any member of a race might be put in a position where they feel at isolated or different. Understood that you thought thld not be permissible. I meant to say it quite differently. What we object to is the consideration of race in a box. Race in a box checking way. C, gin the basis of checking the box alone. Wary . Wre . Theres only one place the diri court found that an applicant checking a box automatically gets greater points. I did not say that. I said they can tce into account based on t iormation alone. Youre making assumptions with tt. I can look at something and say let methe rest of the application and see if that warrants that extra point but where can you point to in the record where merely checking e box, standing alone is one faaffect somebody . Here is an email exchange in the record, though it is sealed, but i think the court is familiar with it. One person, not thee committee. It was a chat between three people. [indiscernible] or is that the harvard case . Man take it back to another question and just make sure i understand your answer to it . You said not race in a boxchecking way, but then the justice said race in an experiential way, and you said yes to that. Of course youve always been subject to discrimination. Certainlyei subject to discrimination is one part of what it means to have race affect your experiences generally. What are you saying a college can look at and what they cannot look at when ty e reading an essay about the experiences that a person has had in eilife . The reason race may have contextual revance is like a story about being subjected to racial inequities shows that they have overcome some hardip if you are looki at the character and experience of the applican oer than their in color being subject tdirete nation, are you exceeding two other parts of an application that the universities need to look at or this is just complaints about Racial Discrimination xample, an Asian American stuho took an active iert in traveling backeir grandmothers country of originr someone who was invested in particular Outdoor Activities with the interest of supporting Asian American students, those show dedication and involvement, global inter the world. They also show notersavvy applicant. One thing an essay is going to show is that he is Asian American and those of the people who are disk related against. Discriminated against. Yes, that is true. So, it is the case that rinamerican applicants can highlight that aspect of their background in situations such as the one you mentioned, and that people reading that following the Admissions Office can look at that and take that into account . Yes, but what we object to is st ting into account race independent of any information. However they taking race into account independent of the rest of the information in a holistic review process . My other question was about this same thing. How is race being used in this process . You keep saying we object to the of race standing alone, but as i read the rerdnd understand their process, it is never standing alone. It isn e context of all of the other factors. There are 40 factors about all sorts of things that the Admissions Office is l at, you have not demonstrated or shown one situation in which all th lk at is race, a take from that stereotypes and other things. They are looking at the full person with all of these characteristics. Our point is that all of those other characteristics are not in the constitution, and race is. Just because somebody checks a box, what if they check it and the university sees that but doesnt look att, doesnt take it into t in any way in the application . Do wea constitutional violation just because the student voluntarily said, i am an africanamerican. But that never comes io ay. In the University Admissions process, it instructs readers not to take that into account or award any benefit toward admission on that basis,ha it is not necessarily a p. No instns. It just never actually comes into play. If you say what i think y saying, is that people haveo mask their identities when they come into contact with the Admissions Office, just on the basis of their differences. It never comes into play. I dont think this is different from other criteria. For example, uncs stance at trial is that gender is not part of admissions process. That does t an that they are not aware that women are implbut the instructions are not to take gender into mknowledge, we dont see a large effe aall suggesting that gender is playingole. Found that race was in factse ering to a number of applic paired you can debate between our expert and their expert whether it was 500, 1700, 2000 applications per year. If it is not having an effect, th senng an awful lot of time and money opposing this case. Let me give you hypothetical along the lines of some of what you have been question about already. Suppose that a student is an immigrant from africa and moves to a rural area in Western North carolina, where the population is overwlmgly white. The stenin an essay does not say, i was subjected to any kind of overtisimination, but i did have to deal with huge cultural differences, i had to find a way of relating to my classmates who came from very ent background. Would that be permissible . I think that would generally be permiib. In that case it is not based upon race,language and new envi. Part of the culture is part of the race, isnt it . That is slicing the baloney awfully thin. In jury selection cases, we can see the sam as trunk custody cases but the dnce between using express racia class youre telling them the race m and it means something that is an here early divigets us further away from how the government treats race as irrelevant. Ty are offering it because ey s race matters to me. This is notituation in which the unty is asking or telling every applicant, give us your race so we can classify people, so we can give certain people preferences. The only reason why the ersity knows the r any of these applicants is because they are voluntarily providing that. Taking distinctions on who it will admit, at least i, on the race of the applicant. Some res get the benefit and do t. Turning to the precedence for a moment, distinguished on the one hand between racial quotas which the justice said would be impermissible with pursuing racial diversity and cl mass of different races on campus. How are we to think about stinguishing between those concepts . The riadiversity point is interesting because the c of other precedents have jected it as a compelling intest. Rejected racial diversity as a rele fin k12 we think it is an exception to that and the other cases come in terms of disfavoring the use of race. In youriew, most of your briefs not putting aside the last 10 pages or so, but in your view it would not matter if there was a precipitous decline in minority admissions, africanan, hispanic, one if i think there is some numbers in this case, but suppose it just fell through the floor. You know, too bad . I dont think it is going to fall to the floor. I know you think that and there has been a l o litigation about that, how much will it decline and your expert and their expert. At the logic of your position suggests that really does not matter. The last 10 pages of your brief where you say there has been narrow, it matters and that 10 pages but not if you say this cagocal rule noacshall be involved iadssions decisions, then it doesnt matter if minority enrollment or particular kinds of minority enrollment fall to the floor. Does it . If the application proce i open as a result of the criteria the university has elected to and not discriminatory in other precedents, then that is the ednal decision the university has made. I doubt any university would make that decision, for example, an of florida wchs raceneutral and has similar demographics to unc and by uncs on record, 50 greater number lets get back toheact of what universities can do with whaturse to achieve racial diversity even without being plit about racial clsifications. Putting that aside, i guess what i am saying is your brief and this is explicit in yo bef it just does nomaer if our institutions look like america. You say this on page 11 in your reply. I guess what im asking you, doesnt it . Doesn it . These ar the pipelines to leadersh in our society. It mht be military leadership. Itight be business leadership. Itig be leadership in the law or all kinds of aas. Iversities are the pipeline to that leadersp. Now, if universities are not racially diverse and your rule suggests it doesnt matter well, then all of those institutions are not gngo be racially diverse either. And i thought that part of what it meanto an american and to believe in american pluralm,ur institutions are reflective owhwe are as a people in all our variety. I think that is right. Think the reason that is a Great American ideal is we expect government is going to be open to everybody who wishes to apply and that because merit is a contributor to soety is not correlated with your skin color. Naturally, a govt that treats People Fairly and makes offers opened all will necessarily see racial diversity i think youre right to say this. You said to one of my colleagues questions, it doesnt matter. Theyre spending an awful lot of time and money and anxie dng something that doesnt matter. Lets presume it does matter. Lets presumitoes matter and these programs have been unrstood to be necessary to ensure that these institutions have a certain level of racial diversity. And i concede what Justice Gorsuch says it is a bit mysterious but have a certain level of racl diversity that would enable them to get the benefits of all our ny different peoples and enables American Society generaldo the same. I tne of the problems is it suggests this is somehow costless. That we cant identify exactly how many points although, [indiscernible] it says it is not that big of a deal. It is always plus factor never a negative but this is a zerosum game. It suggests the harm of rac classifications which this court have always recognized our hidden or pushed down as long as race is just one of ny factors. Council, if you have i thought your objection is also thatace neutral alternatives you have to try those first. Youont think university has, right . We do not think university has made a commitment and we presented a lot of evidence on this case. We do not think the district if they do if they cannot take t b being checked into account ct do that and do try cesual alternativesis there evidence in the record abouwh the results of those would be . Er words, take an example, if all of the sudden the nuerssays that talk about the experience of being an africanamerican in society rises dramatically, the consequences of that be the same as if theyre not being mentioned but instead race is taken into account automatically . I want to make sure i understand the question. It is a little awkrd raised. I would not say that. The question is to there is some sort of cheating or not a bit. The discussion has been abt theratic plummeting of the number of africanamerican st that would take place if the practice ochecking a suggestion is, if not, maybe it would be an incentive for the university to truly pursue raceneutral alternatives such as allowing, which i thi wld be allowed, the students, applicants to indicate experiences they have had because of their race. That is correct. Theres of room for unc to improve its socioeconomic divers it claims to this but the preference to our audience testimony is lesser than it gi race. Something like the average Median Income in north carol is about 53,000 a year but the average unc student comes fm families making 153,000 year. The percentage of firstgeneration colle students and the studeo are receiving scholarships under the carolina covenant had declined in recent years. Close your position will put a lot of pregoing forward if as raceneutral the first place. Is it socioeconomic time to top 10 plant raceneutral . Do you want to respond . I did not mean to interrupt i dont think that has been the experience. There are nine states that have e use of the program. We are not aware of anyone who has challenged racneral on the grounds , can sure whaifies as raceneutral in the first place. What if the caller says we are plus two descendants of slaves . That raceneutral . Because it is so highlyestion correlated with race is true in our country. I know we have to think forward about what will happen ifourevail in this case and that seems potential, so i curse about your answer to that question. My instincts standing, if that were the only basis, then that quickly starts to look like pure proxy for race. It would depend on the aual program is implent. Could you give a plus two applicants whose parents wer immigrants to this country . I think is that race neutra if it is immigrants regardless of country, racial descendant, i think that is probably closer what did the ev sho in terms of race neutral alternatives from your perspective and would numbers plummet . No. Following the analysis, some of which assumed holistic proce that was no longer putting a thumb on the sor students of a particular race and it showed you could g the current academic cials of unc average sat and gpa within 15 points, could get very similar, less than one percentage difference, in individual racial breakdowns. Equal or greater than overall underrepresented minority representation. Of course, socioeconomic diversity increase significantly. I think it is telling in the districts courts analysis it gave we went toheossibility of a socioeconomic preference. Yet would create a diversity different than what unc prers and we think that is parte prlem. Simulations. Every one of them. This report. In everyone of them, white representation stayethsame or went down. So minority groups increased but others did not. Blacks decreased iy one of your simulatns the District Court also looked at your seam electio aut each and every one of them had failed statistical flawsos of not the least of wchhat you relied ounrealistic assumptions about the applicant po. In one of tm, the modified simulation which you seem to be relying on here assumes unc could admit the states 750 highest scoring most conomic disadvantaged Public School students that all of them would apply, that all of them would accept is as unrealistic as you can get. That you put forth that achieved the numbers thaarbeing achieved today. They are imperfect. We have no racial quotas. Weot have proportionate representi. Bu me a simulation in any of your two ceshat reached thers for every ethnic group most of that suggest the standard is a particular dard o, i am just saying we know representation for asian ams, for example, has grown dramatically over time as her numbers and the populations have increased so have their admissionsrs. But i am just saying if we dont have proportionality and no one is seeking that because that would be a racial classification. If we have improvement, all i see in your models is we step backwards, we dont step forwards. I disagree for a couple of reasons. Tell us what the reasons are. Istrict court basically confthe educational benefits of diversity, which is with all representation onnizes campus. I dont think theres any evidence in the recordc which is supposed to bear the of proof that having a black population of 8. 6 t versus 8. 4 results in fewer benefits of education. Thank you, counsel. Justice thomas . Justice alito . Justice yor . Just to finish that point, we do known numbers decrease in schools at the University California in michigan, the Oklahoma School system, that blacks have reported feeling isolated and having their voices stifled. Yes, although the correlation offered in the briefs breaks down to thrlying informioposted just to take california for exaat uc davis which has africanamerican representation several points lower than ucerced,re are you can see that at unc, native americans who have a small percentage of representation on campus compared africanamericans feeling less racially isolated. It is insuffici Justice Kagan . You made a reference earlier in your remarks about gender differens. Theres a lot of statistical evidence that sugges lleges now when they app genderneutral criteria get many more women tn men. And assume that continues to be tr so that using gendereual ctea, you know, m a 30 of a class or 35 and the University Said that is neier hlthy for our universi life nor is it healthy for society that men are sondereducated as compared to me uld a university put a thumb on the scales and say it is important that we ensure that men continue to receive College Educations at not perfect equality but roughly in the same ballpa well, of course. With respect to the equal protection clause that is been suecto somewhat lse scrutiny than racial classifications, so even i could justify them under this courts jurisprudence, i dont classifications. Ustify racial you are right about the levels of scrutiny, b that would be chillier, wouldnt it . White men get the thumb on the scale but people who have been kicked in the teeth by our society for centuries do n our position is white men could not get a thumb on the skull. Qualification. Ke a racial men could. Not white men. The answer is, ulyou see intermediate scrutiny in that case . I dont know. We have said that gender differences never suggested to the Court Protection clause to the inherent insidious level that racial classifications do in this case is about racial classifications. Justice gorsuch . This court in the Virginia MilitaryInstitute Case said gender would be impermissible basis for discussion aiding against africans applicants there. The situation was somewhat different and it was a total exclusion if i recall correctly. There would ever be appropriate place to have a sexbased charactest. Im just noting it is different. How about religion, for exple . So edence that harvard adopte its approach because it s part concerned about buenghe jewish applicants and are looking for a way to reduce the nber of jewish persons without resorting to a ota at least, that is what we bee told. Is an illustration putting something in holistic [indiscernible] i want ask about title vi. Title vi says no person shall be excluded from participation or be subjected to discriminatn under any program or activity that receives federal financial assian. Justice evs argued whatever the 14th amendment blo, title vi does not permit the use of race. You did not make much of that point i knew your briefs. I juswa to understand why. In our view with the educational context, their stunted difference h they should r we understand some view the title vire clear language. It hasnt been briefed and i dont think it can be justified as some sort of constitutional avoidance because the constitutional quests been it has been decided incorrectly so you would not be avoiding a constitutional decision, just arguing a bad decision on the books. Justice kavanaugh . Youre aus to overrule but first i want understand what you think it means. It had language about a 25 year limit. The current omission was. For the class of 27. Would be too late to know anything about that cycle. The next is class when you read or calcuo the extent you conit at all the 25 year limit, more br how should we think about that which was part of the importagraphs about the importancerace conscious decisionmaking being timelimited and temporary . We do not understand that 25 year limit, hard and fast requirement. Rly different justices to differing positions as to whether you think ago for 35 or 50 years . I think the language at least had an aspirational element and for a reason. The class makes clear they nt the use of race to be diminishing over time and they want colleges scarcely looking at how taway from race. The rerdn this case indicates that is not happening. Head of uncsacneutral Alternatives Committee testified if the racial distribution on campus was 20 africanamerican, 20 Asian American, 20 hispanic, 20 native american that was still not sufficient. Would not be sufficient and th should stop using race. The second question, little off trk here, but were thinking about what would happen if you prevail in this case, an amicus brief from catholic universities that say private religious collesould have a free exercise right to continue to engage in affirmative action because it is part of their religious mission. Do you have any views on that . I dont know i have any specificiews on that breed. Histor there has been sometimes conflation of race and religion. I think some people would have thought harvards policy was there may be difficult questions but i think in this case, the is no suggestion they have any role to play rolled a play. Thank you. Justice barrett . Mr. Strawbridge, you agree universities have educational benefits at large butaving difference of genders, different viewpoints in the classroom because of the educational benefit of bringing different perspectives to bear . I dont think compelling interest question can be answered apart from what the policies be considered is. I understand that. Let say do you agree they have an interest in . I have no doubt. About achieving that . Est they go s say you prevail but universities still have an interest in a someone dive classes, full of students that bring different expenses and perspectives to bear and they decide not to adopt the 10 plan. So i assume it is all done in holistic review. Yes, and thes nothing wrong holistic reewakes place today a colleges that do not use race as a facto so theres no reasossume and no evidence in the record that students of those collegesre not receiving educational i guess what im concerned about, puts a loofressure on the essay writing. You could i viewpoint discrimination issues i would thindending on how Admissions Officers treat essays. You could have free exercise claims not by relig religiouslyffiated universities want to give funds letsay two lds students but if you have harvard saying we want this many jews but also this many christians, this many muslims in a classroom. I guess we dont need to understand to be in part the interest in this broad diversity actually justiind of background managing the pulations on campus in the way youre suggesting. I dont think the universities are doing that at least if socioeconomically challenge of admit they havent said that to im not sure it follows on the io where we prevail that iting to affect one way or another the holistic process. Thank you. Justiceackson . Two questions. Is there any indication this record that you would see is doing the kind of micromanaging youre talking about with respect to two racial classificati i did not see they were shooting for a particular tart there as the reviewers went through e ocess, they did not even kn h many other students of color had beendmitted and if they didnt know, ad to be recused so they are not some sort of racial goal. Ard am i wrong abot . So the policy is they are not re toward some sort of the post litigation no, i would not go so far as to say that. Parr i would look at the race have a neutral analysis that uncs eerts proffered and throughout the record even i have little time. m sorry. Say they change the process but now theyre looking they are not racebalancing in that same sense . They measured it as to what they could achieve by whether they can replicate the precise leve of diversity. Let me ask another question because i take it your position is unc is allowed to consider other nonracebased personal characriics of individual applicants like someones status as a parent or a military veteran or disabled person and give pluses in the current holistic environment for those characteristics without running afoul of the 14th amendment. Is that right i think that is generally correct as lonas the criteria does not hecan give pluses. What im worried about is t the rule youre advocating that in the context oa listic review process university can take intoount in value all of thether background and personal characteristics of other applicants but they cat value race, what im worried about is that seems to me to have the potential of causing more of an equal protection problem then it is solving. The reason why i get to that possible conclusion is thinking about two applicants who like to have their family background credited in this applications process and im applicant says, i am from north carolina. I family en in this area for generations, sincee the civil war. I would like you to kno i would be the fit generation to te from the university of north carolina. I ve that opportunity to do that and given my family background, it is important to mei get to attend these university. I want to honor my familys legacy by go this school the Second Applicant says, i am from north carolina. My family has been in this area for generations, since before vil war, but they were slaves aer had a chance to attend this honorable instit as an africanamerican, i now have that unity and given my family background, it is important to me attend these universi i wahonor my family legacy by going to thool. Now if i understand your no race nscious admissions rule, these two applicants would have a dramatically dif opportunity to tell their families stories and to ha them count most the First Applicant would be able to his family background considered and valued by the institution as part of its consideration of whether to admit him while the second one would not be able to because his story is in m ways bound up with his race and the race of his ancestors. I want to know on how your gly play out in scenarios ke that, why excluding considn of race in a situation in which then is not saying his race is something as impacted him in a negative way, he just want other person has their personale back family story honored why is telling him no not an equal protection violati . I think because if it is the racial aspect of the application, the nuchal protectionres people of all ra treatedqually. Certainly, unc should not give a legacy benefit. Eres no obligation you have im sorry, said it was ok if they give him a legacy benefit. What i am saying is if it is almost exactly the same set of circumstances were going to break away for a few minutes but you can continue following the College Admissions case on cspan. Org. We take you live now to the u. S. Capitol. This morning the house is holding what is expected to be a brief pro forma session. No vote scheduled today