Supreme Court Hears Hours Of Affirmative Action Arguments

The video discusses lawsuits against Harvard and UNC regarding race consideration in admissions, which some argue violates the Constitution. Current Supreme Court precedent allows race as a factor but not quotas. Conservative justices express doubts about the necessity of race consideration. Opponents suggest alternative methods for achieving diversity. If the precedent is overturned, it could impact elite universities and leadership diversity. A final decision is expected by next summer.

What is the main argument against the consideration of race in university admissions?

• It violates the Constitution.

• It is the only factor considered.

• It is a new practice.

• It ensures diversity.

According to the current Supreme Court precedent, how can race be used in admissions?

• As a quota for racial representation.

• As the sole factor for admission.

• As one of many factors considered.

• As a mandatory requirement.

What is Chief Justice John Roberts' view on the future of race consideration in admissions?

• It will never end.

• It is not necessary for diversity.

• It will end in 25 years.

• It should be the primary factor.

What alternative to race consideration is mentioned in the transcript?

• Setting racial quotas.

• Reducing student intake.

• Holistic review process.

• Increasing tuition fees.

What concern does Justice Elena Kagan express about the impact of overturning the precedent?

• It will improve educational quality.

• It will affect leadership diversity.

• It will reduce the number of applicants.

• It will increase university costs.