BOSTON — A federal appellate panel ruled on Thursday that the 2023 Supreme Court decision restricting race-conscious admissions does not extend to a defined category of admissions practices that consider applicants' written reflections on their backgrounds and lived experiences, providing operational clarity that several admissions offices have been waiting for before changing their practices.

The decision, issued by the First Circuit in a case brought by a coalition of selective universities, holds that the Supreme Court's underlying analysis turns on race-conscious decision rules rather than on the consideration of the writing-reflection material itself. The decision is bounded but consequential.

What the decision permits

The decision permits universities to consider essays and other written application materials that discuss applicants' backgrounds, including discussions of how race or ethnicity has shaped applicants' experiences, provided that the consideration is not structured as a race-based decision rule.

The distinction the panel draws between considering content and applying a decision rule is the part of the decision that has been parsed most carefully. The panel takes the view that the underlying constitutional concern is with the rule, not with the consideration; the academic-research community is divided on whether that distinction will hold.

What the decision does not permit

The decision does not authorise admissions offices to apply differential weights to applicants based on race or to use written reflections as a proxy for race in ways that would substantively replicate the practices the 2023 decision prohibited. The panel was specific on this point.

The line between permitted consideration and impermissible proxy-use is, in practice, not always easy to draw. The decision provides operational guidance but acknowledges that the application of the guidance will require careful institutional judgment.

What admissions offices are doing

Admissions offices that had been waiting for the decision before adjusting their practices have indicated, in conversations with their counsel, that they expect to issue revised guidance to their staff within the next several weeks. The revised guidance will, on most accounts, allow the consideration of the relevant written materials within the parameters the decision establishes.

Several offices that had already made adjustments based on conservative readings of the 2023 decision are now reconsidering whether their adjustments went further than necessary. The reconsideration is itself a significant institutional process that will take time.

The Supreme Court question

The decision is appealable, and several legal observers have indicated they expect a petition for further review. Whether the Supreme Court would take up the case depends on factors that are difficult to predict; the Court has not, since the 2023 decision, signalled a clear interest in revisiting the underlying questions.

If the Court does take the case, the underlying questions could be sharpened in ways that affect a broader range of admissions practices. If it does not, the First Circuit's framework will, in effect, govern admissions practice in much of the country until another circuit decides differently.