plowunited.net – The Supreme Court declined to review a case challenging the zip code-based school admissions policy for Boston’s prestigious exam schools. This marks the second time the justices have opted not to intervene in a geographic-based admissions system since their landmark 2023 decision overturning affirmative action in higher education.
The case focused on a 2021 policy overhaul for Boston’s three competitive “exam schools.” Which previously relied on standardized test scores for admission. Under the revised policy, seats are now allocated based on a student’s GPA and the zip code of their residence. Each Boston neighborhood is assigned a specific number of seats proportional to its population of school-age children. With top-performing students in each area receiving priority.
Proponents argue the new system promotes equity by addressing disparities in educational access across Boston’s diverse neighborhoods. Critics, however, claim the policy unfairly disadvantages students from higher-performing areas and may dilute academic standards.
Boston Parents’ Lawsuit Against Zip Code-Based Admissions Rejected by Appeals Court
The Boston Parent Coalition for Academic Excellence, a nonprofit advocating for merit-based admissions. Sued over Boston’s revised exam school admission policy. The organization argued that the “zip code quota” system unfairly reduced the number of Asian American and white students admitted to the city’s competitive schools.
The coalition pointed to incidents of bias as evidence. Including leaked text messages showing school committee members expressing animus toward white residents of West Roxbury. They also highlighted cases where committee members mocked Asian students’ names. Claiming the behavior reflected discriminatory intent in implementing the zip code policy.
Despite these claims, the First Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against the coalition. The court determined that the plaintiffs failed to prove the zip code-based admissions system disproportionately harmed Asian American and white applicants. According to the court, these groups still secured more seats than their share of the overall applicant pool.
Supporters of the policy argue it ensures equitable representation across Boston’s diverse neighborhoods, addressing long-standing disparities in educational access. Critics, however, maintain that the system undermines academic merit and discriminates against high-performing students from certain demographics.
Supreme Court Declines to Hear Challenge to Boston’s Zip Code-Based School Admissions Policy
The Boston Parent Coalition for Academic Excellence appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing that the lower court’s ruling on Boston’s exam school admissions policy effectively amounted to “racial balancing by proxy.” The coalition claimed that the zip code-based system, which reserves seats in competitive schools for top-performing students in each neighborhood, was a veiled attempt to discriminate against Asian American and white applicants.
Despite these concerns, the Supreme Court declined to hear the case, leaving the lower court’s ruling in place. The First Circuit Court of Appeals had previously upheld the policy, determining it did not disproportionately harm any racial group, as Asian American and white students still earned a larger share of seats than their representation in the applicant pool.
Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas dissented from the Supreme Court’s decision. Justice Alito argued that the admissions framework represented “racial balancing by another name” and deemed it unconstitutional. Critics of the policy have echoed these sentiments, suggesting that it undermines merit-based admissions and unfairly penalizes certain demographics.
Supporters of the policy, however, believe it promotes equity and ensures broader geographic and socioeconomic representation in Boston’s prestigious exam schools. They argue that the revised system addresses longstanding disparities in access to educational opportunities.
The decision not to intervene marks a significant moment in the ongoing debate over equity, diversity, and fairness in public education, particularly in light of the Supreme Court’s 2023 ruling striking down affirmative action in higher education. By allowing Boston’s policy to stand, the court has effectively upheld the use of geographic diversity as a criterion for public school admissions.
