Whether an equal protection challenge to facially race-neutral admission criteria is barred simply because members of the racial groups targeted for decline still receive a balanced share of admissions offers commensurate with their share of the applicant pool

QUESTION PRESENTED The Boston School Committee overhauled the criteria for admission to its three competitive “Exam Schools” for the 2021-22 school year. The School Committee replaced the traditional standardized test with a zip code quota that reserved seats for students with the highest GPA in each Boston neighborhood. The number of seats allocated to each neighborhood was based on the neighborhood’s population of schoolaged children. Members of the School Committee spoke openly of their intent to racially balance the Exam Schools at the expense of Asian American and white students. Three of the seven members who voted to enact the quota ultimately resigned in disgrace for racially-charged actions. The district court found that these members “harbored ... racial animus” and that “the race-neutral criteria were chosen precisely because of their effect on racial demographics.” Yet the First Circuit held the School Committee had not violated the Equal Protection Clause because Asian American and white applicants continued to earn seats at the Exam Schools at a rate above the groups’ share of the applicant pool. The question presented is whether an equal protection challenge to facially race-neutral admission criteria is barred simply because members of the racial groups targeted for decline still receive a balanced share of admissions offers commensurate with their share of the applicant pool.