Baala Shakya, Contributing Photographer
On June 29, 2023, the Supreme Court struck down race-conscious college admissions, arguing that the use of affirmative action policies addressing past discrimination and promoting diversity violated the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause.
In light of the rulings in landmark cases such as Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, the results of the 2024 election could trigger drastic changes that could further impact higher education.
“The Supreme Court hangs in the balance of this election. Trump’s previous appointments delivered a seismic rightward shift to American law,” said Duncan Hosie LAW ’21, an appellate lawyer and former fellow at the ACLU.
Impact on Higher Education
Following the ruling on affirmative action, rulings from the Court could affect student loans and Title IX policy.
“Under [Harris’] administration, expect conservative litigation challenging educational access initiatives and loan forgiveness and diversity programs,” Hosie wrote. “A Trump victory would likely spawn progressive legal challenges to policies undermining academic independence and institutional autonomy.”
Gerard Magliocca LAW ’98, McKinney School of Law professor at Indiana University, highlighted that higher education institutions might face litigation over complying with the ruling on affirmative action regardless of who is president.
Previously, Alex Taubes LAW ’15 — New Haven civil rights attorney — told the News that the likelihood of lawsuits against Yale based on race in admissions could increase if Trump wins the election.
Under the Trump Administration, the Department of Education already investigated Yale’s use of race in admissions in 2020. This investigation ended in 2021 after President Biden took office.
Regardless of the administration, Amanda Shanor ’03 LAW ’09 GRD ’22 — a professor at the Wharton School — noted that the Supreme Court will most likely convene within the next year or two to consider Title IX cases. The Court might have to decide on sexual assault protection’s scope and whether protections against sex discrimination extend to LGBTQ+ students.
Potential appointments to SCOTUS
Under either administration, the potential retirement of three of the Court’s oldest justices and the appointment of their replacements hangs in the air.
“The impact the next president might have on the Supreme Court of course depends on two things: whether any incumbent justices leave the bench during the next four years, and the balance of power in the Senate,” said Linda Greenhouse LAW ’78, a senior research scholar at the Yale Law School.
Samuel Moyn, a professor of law and history at Yale, believes everything depends on Samuel Alito LAW ’75 and Clarence Thomas LAW ’74 — the oldest justices — and possibly Sonia Sotomayor LAW ’79.
Moyn notes that if Trump were to replace Sotomayor, it would allow the Supreme Court to shift to the conservative right even further. On the other hand, if Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas were to wait Harris out, then the Court would effectively stay the same. However, Harris may get the opportunity to move the Court left by replacing one or both justices, if elected.
“A Harris presidency could influence the Court’s direction, in the best case by restoring a 5-4 liberal court the likes of which has not existed in some decades,” said Moyn.
If a vacancy occurs while the White House and the Senate are controlled by different parties, then a major stalemate would be inevitable, Greenhouse believes, slowing progress on either side’s agenda.
Republicans are poised to win control in the Senate, making nominations especially difficult under a potential Harris administration.
Magliocca, however, believes neither Alito nor Thomas would retire under a Harris administration. He stated that, on the other hand, the “most likely” result of a Trump victory would be their retirement.
Future SCOTUS Rulings
Given the Supreme Court’s composition, various legal experts noted that its direction would remain constant regardless of who is elected president.
Moyn said that the Supreme Court has been on a journey to the right for 50 years. However, he noted that there is unlikely to be a ruling as significant as Roe v. Wade under the next administration.
Greenhouse emphasized the conservative trend would continue regardless of who serves as president in the next term. She does not predict that the court will restore the right to abortion.
However, Greenhouse noted that the conservative majority in power of the Supreme Court still has many opportunities to “change the status quo.”
“I am not one who believes that the Court will overturn Obergefell v. Hodges, the decision that recognized a constitutional right to same-sex marriage,” Greenhouse wrote. “But there is a lot the Court can do to deprive LGBTQ people of full equality, such as by elevating the role of religion to enable discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.”
Legal commentator David Lat LAW ’99 noted that the Court is unlikely to rule on cases as significant as those on affirmative action and abortion. Magliocca also told the News that the Court would likely not revisit landmark cases.
Instead, Lat wrote that the Court might rule on First Amendment cases given the recent discourse on free speech and protest at universities.
Shanor highlighted that the election will impact the Court even if there are no new appointments.
The presidency, Shanor stated, sets a larger trajectory in national ideology, one that spreads to the Court. Shanor said that a Harris presidency could shift conservative justices such as Justices Amy Coney Barrett, Brett Kavanaugh ’87 LAW ’90 and Chief Justice John Roberts closer toward the center.
The current oldest justice, Clarence Thomas, is 76 years old.