The U.S. Supreme Court announced on Monday that it will hear two separate challenges to race-based admissions policies at Harvard University and the University of North Carolina. The National Review reported:

The Court will hear challenges by non-profit Students for Fair Admissions against Harvard University and the University of North Carolina. The group alleges that Harvard discriminates against Asian applicants, and that UNC uses race in admissions even though “race-neutral alternatives can achieve diversity.”

Arguments will likely be heard in spring of this year, with a decision by June.

“We are grateful the Supreme Court accepted these important cases for review,” SFA president Edward Blum said in a statement. “It is our hope that the justices will end the use of race as an admissions factor at Harvard, UNC and all colleges and universities.”

A video from Students for Fair Admissions highlights the nature of the admissions policies being challenged which the video calls a "trojan horse for discrimination":

The cert petitions for the cases show shocking details such as racial disparities in admission rates at Harvard and the crude way admissions officers comment on race at UNC. 

From Student for Fair Admissions cert petition in UNC case, here's how admissions officers crudely talk about race. pic.twitter.com/VPcuNpaqy4

— Ed Whelan (@EdWhelanEPPC) January 24, 2022

The biggest critic of affirmative action policies on the Court is undoubtedly Justice Clarence Thomas. With the current makeup of the Court, we may see a decision that reflects Justice Thomas' dissent in Grutter v. Bollinger.

With the Supreme Court's announcement that it will hear two cases on race-based affirmative action in college admissions, here's what Justice Thomas had the following to say about affirmative action in 2003. #CTwisdom pic.twitter.com/iXt5vKBcXO

— Justice Thomas Fan Account (@JusticeThomas) January 24, 2022

In 2003, the majority in Grutter v. Bollinger said that it expected in 25 years that racial preferences would no longer be necessary.

Justice Thomas had this to say in his partial dissent: https://t.co/2jTmNZmMvd pic.twitter.com/48McUgArDq

— JCN (@judicialnetwork) January 24, 2022

Arguments will likely be heard in spring of this year with a decision released by the end of June.