Sonia Sotomayor, one of many three liberal justices on the Supreme Court, mentioned in her dissenting opinion on the Harvard case that the courtroom turned its again on 45 years of jurisprudence geared toward selling extra inclusive and equal faculties, and that “the devastating impact of this decision cannot be overstated.”

“Today, this Court stands in the way and rolls back decades of precedent and momentous progress,” she wrote, including that the choice “cements a superficial rule of colorblindness as a constitutional principle in an endemically segregated society where race has always mattered and continues to matter.”

The choice, she wrote, “subverts the constitutional guarantee of equal protection by further entrenching racial inequality in education, the very foundation of our democratic government and pluralistic society.”

Justice Sotomayor argued that almost all’s imaginative and prescient of race neutrality “will entrench racial segregation in higher education because racial inequality will persist so long as it is ignored.”

But regardless of her scathing language, Justice Sotomayor ended on a defiant be aware, writing that regardless of the courtroom’s actions, “society’s progress toward equality cannot be permanently halted.”

“The pursuit of racial diversity will go on,” she wrote. “Although the Court has stripped out almost all uses of race in college admissions, universities can and should continue to use all available tools to meet society’s needs for diversity in education.”

Another of the liberal justices, Ketanji Brown Jackson, wrote in her dissent that “it would be deeply unfortunate if the Equal Protection Clause actually demanded this perverse, ahistorical, and counterproductive outcome.”

“To impose this result in that Clause’s name when it requires no such thing, and to thereby obstruct our collective progress toward the full realization of the Clause’s promise, is truly a tragedy for us all,” she wrote.

Both Justice Sotomayor and Justice Jackson criticized the bulk for making an exception for army academies. Justice Jackson wrote that almost all concluded that “racial diversity in higher education is only worth potentially preserving insofar as it might be needed to prepare Black Americans and other underrepresented minorities for success in the bunker, not the boardroom.”