The U.S. Supreme Court is taking two cases that could prevent medical schools’ current practice of considering race/ethnicity in admissions decisions: Students for Fair Admission Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College and Students for Fair Admission Inc. v. University of North Carolina et al. The first considers if Harvard’s admissions processes penalize Asian Americans and in turn violate Title VI of the Civil Rights Act. The second North Carolina case asks if the Supreme Court should overturn a 2003 decision, Grutter v. Bollinger, which allows race to be used as a component of admissions decisions.
In response to the Supreme Court’s review of the upcoming cases, the AMA and AAMC, along with 40 other organizations, submitted an amicus brief urging the court to “take no action that would disrupt the admissions processes the nation’s health-professional schools have carefully crafted in reliance on this court’s longstanding precedents.” The brief notes the key role that diversity in medical school admissions plays in reducing health disparities by increasing the number of minority practitioners, who are more likely to serve in minority communities, and also by increasing the effectiveness of all physicians through a more diverse learning and training environment. The brief points to scientific research and studies showing the benefits of diversity, saying that “Preventing medical educators from continuing to consider diversity in admissions … would literally cost lives and diminish the quality of many others.” The brief also suggests the possibility that overruling the use of race in admissions decisions may, “...potentially trigger a spiral of severe and self-reinforcing decreases in diversity in the health care professions. States that have banned race-conscious admissions have seen the number of minority medical school students drop by roughly 37% as a result.”