Last summer, the US Supreme Court (SCOTUS) ruled that using race in college admissions was unconstitutional, leading some of the top-ranked colleges and universities across the nation to quickly reinvent their admissions practices. Since that change, researchers and other interested observers have eagerly awaited the 2024–25 enrollment data to see how the ruling would affect the racial and ethnic diversity of colleges and universities, particularly those with selective admissions. However, the data released so far have provided little clarity.

Some schools have seen significant declines in the enrollment of students from certain racial or ethnic groups, whereas others have seen no change in the racial make-up of their entering class. A few have even reported increases in students from certain historically underrepresented racial groups.

So far, these data seem to have no clear pattern. There are no consistent differences between schools that are public or private, those in blue states or red states, and those that are more or less selective. This inconsistency among a relatively small set of schools raises two questions: Why is there variation, and what does it mean?

Clear answers will require more information. But for now, the available data, previous research, and the overall policy environment suggest three factors may be causing the variation in racial diversity we’re seeing in these early numbers. 

1. Admissions policies and practices

In response to the SCOTUS decision, many selective institutions suddenly had to find race-neutral policies that would enable them to admit and enroll a racially diverse student body. A 2023 study found that 91 of 123 selective colleges and universities considered race in admissions. Although we don’t know for sure how these schools have modified their admissions practices, any newly implemented race-neutral admissions policies will certainly affect the racial diversity of their enrollment.

One practice that could contribute to the enrollment data variation is the return to required standardized tests at a growing number of selective schools. The effect of required standardized tests on enrollment diversity remains unclear, and the current data offers little insight, as most of the schools reporting early numbers are test optional or have yet to implement the requirement. Although announcing a return to required standardized tests may have affected the diversity of a school’s pool of applicants, it doesn’t seem to be a major factor among the set of schools that have released their enrollment numbers.

2. Applicant pools

Changes in the racial diversity of applicant pools could explain some variation. In California, the diversity of enrolled students declined at some colleges after Proposition 209 passed, which banned race-based affirmative action. Fewer academically qualified students of color applied to the most selective schools in the University of California system after the ban, instead applying to less-selective public or elite private schools. This switch was especially true for Black students.

It's not a stretch to think that after the SCOTUS ruling, some selective colleges and universities had a less diverse applicant pool, which could have affected the diversity of their enrollment. Unfortunately, publicly available national data on the racial diversity of college applicants don’t exist, and none of the schools releasing their enrollment numbers have provided applicant data (with some schools no longer collecting race data on applicants at all). The Common App has reported (PDF) an increase in the racial diversity of applicants, but it’s unclear how representative their data are of applicants to selective colleges and universities.

Additionally, nearly all schools that report applicants who decline to identify their race or ethnicity have seen sizeable increases in that share of applicants. Those applying to selective institutions have long expressed concerns about disclosing their race, and current applicants now have another reason to opt against disclosing their race, as it no longer factors into admissions. Unfortunately, we don’t have the data to determine if some diversity declines are because of students of color choosing not to identify their race, but it's certainly something to continue monitoring.

3. Non-SCOTUS factors

For all the focus on the SCOTUS ruling, other factors not directly related to the ruling could also affect these early numbers. Twenty-seven states have introduced or passed anti–diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) legislation that goes well beyond the SCOTUS ruling. Much of this legislation not only prohibits colleges from considering race and ethnicity in admissions or employment but also eliminates DEI offices and staff that often help with the recruitment of applicants of color.

Although state anti-DEI legislation largely (but not exclusively) is limited to public institutions, some private schools have established institutional anti-DEI policies, such as those eliminating race-based scholarships. These policies could have an adverse effect on students of color applying to and enrolling in certain schools.

Another potential factor affecting early enrollment numbers was the headline story of this summer, the delays and calculation errors that plagued the roll out of the new Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA). These issues prevented students from receiving timely information regarding the type and amount of financial aid they would receive, putting their college plans in limbo.

Graduates from high schools with more students of color and students with low incomes were disproportionally affected, as FAFSA applications from those schools were down 10 percent compared with the same time the year prior. Uncertainty regarding financial aid packages may have caused applicants to highly selective colleges and universities (particularly applicants from racially underrepresented groups) to choose more-affordable options or pass on college altogether.

More information is needed to fully understand variation in race and ethnicity enrollment data

Early enrollment numbers showing declines in students of color at many selective institutions are certainly troubling. And it would not be a stretch to connect some of this decline to last summer’s SCOTUS ruling. But the data are far from conclusive—some institutions saw no change or even increases in the share of enrolling students of color. Other factors beyond the SCOTUS ruling, such as the announced return of required standardized tests, state and institutional anti-DEI policies, and the new FAFSA issues, could have also contributed to these changes.

Without more information beyond enrollment numbers, we can only speculate as to how these factors (and potentially others) contributed to changes in the enrollment diversity of the first post–affirmative action cohort. For our part, Urban is leading a coalition of organizations that are working with a diverse set of colleges and universities to try to figure out why there’s variation and what it means. With additional data, not only will we have a better sense of the factors contributing to changes in the racial makeup of the class of 2028, but we will be better positioned to assist colleges and universities to identify strategies for maintaining equitable admissions in the new legal landscape of college admissions.