In what Ed Whelan dubbed "The Chief Justice's Greatest Opinion," the Supreme Court has dealt a fatal blow to affirmative action in higher education:

The Supreme Court today issued its long-awaited decision on whether the admissions systems used by Harvard College and by the University of North Carolina unlawfully discriminate on the basis of race. In a combined ruling in the two cases, a six-justice majority ruled that the admissions systems violate Equal Protection standards—standards that apply directly to UNC as a state institution under the Equal Protection Clause and that apply to Harvard, as a recipient of federal funding, via Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. . .

This week is shaping up to be another historic week at the Supreme Court, which is expected to release the remaining decisions from its 2022-2023 term. Two of the most closely watched cases are challenging the alleged race-based admissions policies of Harvard and UNC Chapel Hill. As Judicial Crisis Network's Carrie Severino pointed out on Fox News, Americans are tied of the discriminatory, race-based college admissions policies.

The majority of Americans do not want race factored into college admissions.

I hope the Supreme Court will finally clarify that it is unconstitutional to use race-based admissions to discriminate against students.

📺 @FoxNews pic.twitter.com/lGw0k7fIzf

— Carrie Severino (@JCNSeverino) June 26, 2023

Today, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Students for Fair Admissions v. University of North Carolina ("the UNC case") and Students for Fair Admissions Inc. v. President & Fellows of Harvard College ("the Harvard case"), which, together, are expected to overturn Grutter v. Bollinger and hold that the use of affirmative action policies in college admissions is unconstitutional.

Happening now: about 100 people, mostly Asian, are gathered in front of the Supreme Court to rally against affirmative action, one day before hearings begin in the Harvard/UNC cases. They are holding signs like: “I am Asian American, I have a dream too” pic.twitter.com/J6f4FKzian

— Amy Qin (@amyyqin) October 30, 2022

It appears that Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson has quietly "un-recused" herself from the UNC affirmative action case coming before the Court during its 2022-2023 term. As Dan McLaughlin explained, the case was previously consolidated with a case implicating Harvard in a similar alleged violation:

As I set forth in detail back in February, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson has an obligation to recuse herself from the pending case on racial preferences in Harvard admissions because she sat on the Harvard Board of Overseers not only during the events under challenge — which are ongoing — but also during the yearslong defense of the litigation, including at the Supreme Court. Justice Jackson agreed, and testified at her confirmation hearing that she would recuse. But Jackson’s recusal obligation should have extended as well to the consolidated case, for two reasons: because Harvard was engaged in a joint defense of the case with the University of North Carolina (the two cases were consolidated) and because a victory for UNC could redound to the benefit of Harvard in the event that the Court divided 4-4 or reached a fractured outcome in the Harvard case (granting that the two legal standards could end up differing). . .

The nomination of Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to the Supreme Court has raised questions about her ability to objectively rule on an affirmative action case coming before the Court during the 2022-2021 term involving Harvard University where she serves as a member of the board of overseers:

After Justice Stephen Breyer retires from the bench later this year, the Supreme Court is poised to hear arguments this fall in one of the most significant cases before the court regarding race-based admissions policies at Harvard and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. If the Senate does confirm Jackson to succeed Breyer, her involvement on Harvard's board of overseers would raise questions regarding the Judicial Code of Conduct, which instructs judges to "avoid even the appearance of conflicts or bias," Turley wrote in an op-ed for the Hill on Tuesday.

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.”