Thousands of protesters gathered outside the Supreme Court on April 1 to support affirmative action programs at public universities.

When the Supreme Court handed down its landmark 1978 Bakke decision upholding affirmative action in education, Harvard was at the forefront of the fight—its admissions system put forward by the Court as a model for other universities to follow.

Twenty-five years later, Harvard and others anxiously await the Court’s decision—expected this month—on a pair of affirmative action cases that threaten to overturn the precedent Harvard helped set.

And for the last year, Harvard has again taken a prominent position in the debate over the role race should play in admissions.

Driven by a philosophy that racial diversity should be a pedagogical priority and by its legacy as a champion of affirmative action, the University acted aggressively in submitting a friend-of-the-court-brief co-signed by seven other Ivy League institutions that argued for race to be considered as one factor in admissions.

A slew of Harvard studies, academic works and editorials provided the fodder for affirmative action supporters nationwide.

And when the Court heard oral arguments for the two cases—which challenge the University of Michigan’s undergraduate and law school admissions systems—Harvard again was a focus, as the two sides debated the merits of the “Harvard plan” that was upheld in Bakke.

Meanwhile, other developments this spring hammered home that for Harvard, the debate was not just a philosophical one.

Down the river, MIT was forced to radically revamp a summer program for high school students which a conservative group complained discriminated in admitting only minorities. And a similar program at the Harvard Business School for college seniors is also under fire, raising the prospect that it too would have to abandon its central mission of serving under-represented racial minorities.

The Shape of the Brief

In the 1978 Regents of the University of California v. Bakke case the Court struck down admissions quotas but permitted the use of race as one factor in admissions.

Now, two students denied admission to the University Michigan argue that the schools’ admission policies are de facto quotas.

Michigan’s undergraduate program uses a 150-point system to rate applicants, with minorities, athletes or economically disadvantaged students receiving a 20 point boost.

The Michigan law school’s policy more closely resembles that of Harvard College, which says only that race is considered as a factor in admissions.

Harvard’s amicus curiae brief, drafted by Tyler Professor of Constitutional Law Laurence H. Tribe ’62 and attorney Jonathan S. Massey, argues that the Court should find both of Michigan’s policies constitutional.

Brown University, the University of Chicago, Dartmouth College, Duke University, the University of Pennsylvania, Princeton University and Yale University accepted Harvard’s invitation to sign the more than 60-page brief, but the focus remained mainly on Harvard’s use of race as one factor in admissions.