The U.S. Supreme Court today turned away an appeal from a group that challenged the race-conscious exam school admissions policy used by Boston Public Schools for the 2021-2022 school year.

Together with other recent decisions, today's action by the Supreme Court signals an increasing unwillingness of federal courts to continue eroding Equal Protection principles, including diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI).

Enacted during the COVID-19 pandemic, the challenged admissions policy relied on GPAs and zip codes. It was designed to rectify previous inequities in the admissions policy at Boston's three highly selective schools (Boston Latin Academy, Boston Latin School, and the John D. O'Bryant School) and to promote greater racial, socioeconomic, and geographic diversity. The Boston Branch of the NAACP, the Greater Boston Latino Network, the Asian Pacific Islanders Civic Action Network (APIs CAN), the Asian American Resource Workshop (AARW), and two families of color intervened in the lawsuit to support the Plan.

The Plan was upheld by the U.S. District Court in Boston and subsequently affirmed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit. Today's refusal by the Supreme Court to hear a further appeal puts an end to the case. It follows the Court's refusal earlier this year to take up an appeal of a similarly race-conscious admissions policy for Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology in Virginia aimed at diversifying the student body. It also follows a ruling last week from a federal judge in Maryland, holding that the race-conscious admissions policy at the U.S. Naval Academy is necessary and supported by a compelling national security interest.

"Today's action by the Supreme Court confirms that school districts not only can but should take affirmative steps to ensure that educational opportunities are equally available to all," said Oren Sellstrom, Litigation Director of Lawyers for Civil Rights, one of the attorneys representing the intervenors in the case who helped to defeat the petition for certiorari. "Our schools are stronger when classrooms are diverse and students from a wide range of backgrounds can learn from each other."

"Ever since the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in the Harvard affirmative action case, right-wing groups have unsuccessfully tried to extend its reach to challenge diversity, equity, and inclusion," added Iván Espinoza-Madrigal, Executive Director of Lawyers for Civil Rights. "But today's action by the Supreme Court sends a clear signal: there's no appetite for extending the affirmative action decision beyond its narrow scope in college admissions."

The intervening organizations and families are represented by Lawyers for Civil Rights; Sidley Austin LLP; Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo P.C.; the Asian Outreach Center of Greater Boston Legal Services; and Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund.