Supreme Court Agrees to Review Challenge to Race-Aware Admissions at Maryland Magnet Schools

A group of parents argues that admissions policies give preference to Black and Latino students while disadvantaging Asian-American applicants.

Published On 20 Oct 202620 Oct 2026

The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear a case challenging the role of race in admissions to selective middle schools in Montgomery County, Maryland, following allegations that admissions policies unfairly disadvantage Asian-American students in favor of Black and Latino applicants.

The court agreed on Monday to review the lawsuit brought by a coalition of parents known as the Association for Education Fairness, which targets four academically rigorous magnet schools located in Montgomery County, a suburban area just outside Washington, D.C.

The justices will determine whether the parent group has presented sufficient evidence of discriminatory impact to allow the case to proceed.

Previously, lower courts had dismissed the lawsuit, noting that the percentage of Asian-American students admitted to the magnet schools exceeded their representation among all applicants.

If the Supreme Court sides with the parent group, it could enable the case to move forward and potentially revive the challenge against the school district’s admissions practices.

Oral arguments are expected to take place in the upcoming months, with a final decision anticipated by June.

Admissions Process and Legal Dispute

The Montgomery County Public Schools system introduced its revised admissions policy—referred to as the “Pandemic Plan”—during the 2021-2022 school year, amid ongoing disruptions caused by the coronavirus outbreak.

This process evaluates all applicants based on academic potential and uses a randomized lottery system to assign students to either magnet schools or traditional neighborhood schools.

Plaintiffs contend that this screening method places Asian-American students—who they claim tend to attend high-performing schools with low poverty rates—at a disadvantage when entering the lottery pool.

A key aspect of the process involves ranking students relative to peers from families with comparable income levels. Critics argue that such adjustments indirectly serve as racial balancing mechanisms.

In their appeal to the Supreme Court, the plaintiffs argued: “Under the applicant pool benchmark, the government can set specific racial targets, meet them, and avoid scrutiny of discriminatory intent—so long as race is not explicitly referenced in the process.”

Lower Court Rulings and Defense Arguments

In 2022, U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis dismissed the case, emphasizing that Asian-American admission rates surpassed their share of total applicants to the magnet programs.

She also concluded there was no evidence indicating that the lottery policy was enacted with discriminatory purpose.

The Montgomery County school district maintains that the updated admissions framework remains race-neutral and constitutionally sound.

In a filing asking the Supreme Court to decline review, district attorneys stated: “The Pandemic Plan is a colorblind lottery. Nothing about the policy, its background, or its objectives violates constitutional principles.”

The Supreme Court’s consideration centers on whether plaintiffs asserting harm under a facially neutral policy must demonstrate disparate impact to establish claims of intentional discrimination.

Source link