U.S. Naval Academy and Affirmative Action Opponent Face Off in Baltimore Trial, Reports Reuters

By Nate Raymond

A group that successfully persuaded the U.S. Supreme Court to eliminate the use of race in college admissions is preparing to take the U.S. Naval Academy to court on Monday. This trial challenges an exemption that has allowed military academies to maintain affirmative action policies.

The upcoming two-week trial, which will take place before a federal judge in Baltimore, stems from lawsuits filed last year against the Naval Academy in Annapolis, Maryland, and the U.S. Military Academy at West Point. The lawsuits were initiated by Students for Fair Admissions, an organization founded by Edward Blum, who opposes affirmative action.

The group aims to build on its June 2023 success at the Supreme Court, where a 6-3 conservative majority banned longstanding policies used by colleges and universities to enhance the enrollment of Black, Hispanic, and other minority students. This Supreme Court ruling invalidated race-conscious admissions practices at institutions such as Harvard and the University of North Carolina, both of which have since reported decreases in Black student enrollment following the decision. The University of North Carolina also experienced a decline in Hispanic enrollment. The full impact of the ruling is still uncertain, as ongoing data collection shows mixed results among various institutions regarding their Black and Hispanic student populations.

The Supreme Court’s ruling, while significant for higher education, did not address the consideration of race in military academy admissions—an aspect highlighted by Chief Justice John Roberts, who noted that military academies may have “potentially distinct interests.”

Blum’s group contends that the principles established by the Supreme Court should also apply to military academies, asserting that their admissions policies are discriminatory and violate the equal protection clause of the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

The Biden administration has presented arguments in court stating that the military has a justified need to consider race in its admissions to cultivate a diverse group of future military leaders for an increasingly diverse fighting force.

U.S. District Judge Richard Bennett, a federal judge appointed by former President George W. Bush, will oversee the trial. A military veteran who served over two decades in the U.S. Army Reserve and the Maryland National Guard, Judge Bennett previously rejected a motion from Students for Fair Admissions to prevent the Naval Academy from considering race in admissions. He emphasized that the racial desegregation of the military in 1948 did not resolve all related issues and noted that the challenges being addressed in the Naval Academy case differ from those encountered in the college admissions context.

During a December hearing, Bennett remarked that the individuals at institutions like Harvard and UNC are not necessarily preparing to lead troops in combat.

Historically, racial tensions within the military during the Vietnam War prompted senior military leadership to recognize that the absence of minority officers eroded trust and undermined mission readiness, according to filings from the Justice Department in this case. The department emphasized the necessity of ensuring that the Naval Academy has a diverse student pipeline to address the ongoing racial disparity between service members and the officer corps.

According to data from the Justice Department, Black individuals make up 13.7% of the U.S. population, 17.5% of Navy sailors, and 10.5% of Marines, yet only 8.3% of Navy officers and 5.9% of Marine officers are Black. In contrast, White individuals represent 62.8% of Navy sailors and 56.5% of Marines while constituting 75% of the Navy’s officer corps and 81% of Marine officers.

Students for Fair Admissions has argued that the Naval Academy engages in unlawful “racial balancing” to achieve desired demographics within its annual classes and relies on racial stereotypes. The group claims that the academy’s beliefs about race and military effectiveness perpetuate the harmful stereotype that officers from specific racial backgrounds possess unique qualities not found in officers of other races.