How Will Fisher V. University of Texas at Austin Change Med School Admissions

Among the many prominent decisions announced by the U.S. Supreme Court earlier this summer, the case that drew the most attention from the education community was Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin. The case, in which a white applicant denied admission to the University of Texas-Austin argued the unconstitutionality of the school’s use of race-conscious admissions policies, had the potential to drastically redefine admissions policies not just for undergraduate institutions, but for graduate and professional schools as well. However, in its 7-1 decision the court elected to send the case back to a lower court for reconsideration, effectively staving off any significant changes to admissions policies for the time being while keeping the door open for further challenges.

Clearly any significant changes to the way in which medical schools review and evaluate applications are important factors for your students to consider, and in the month since the decision was announced, reactions have been varied. Groups on both sides of the debate have reacted with hope, disappointment, and (perhaps most commonly) confusion, as the decision did little to settle the question of the role of race in admissions. The American Medical Student Association (AMSA) released a statement shortly following the decision expressing disappointment, citing a belief that “in order to achieve equal minority representation, U.S. medical schools [must] recognize the goal of graduating a nationwide average of underrepresented minorities reflecting the community at large.” On the other hand, Russ Nieli, a Princeton University lecturer, voiced the opinion in a Kaiser Health News article that affirmative action policies had the potential to ultimately hurt URM students and their reputations by lowering patients’ confidence in their abilities.

The Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) seems to echo the idea at the core of AMSA’s sentiment, stating in an amicus brief on the case, “medical schools have learned over many decades of experience that [their goals] cannot be accomplished unless physicians are educated in environments that reflect the ever-increasing diversity of the society they serve.” And in a statement following the decision Dr. Darrell Kirch, President and CEO of the AAMC, stated “We will continue to work with medical schools in crafting and carefully reviewing the impact of holistic review processes that are narrowly tailored to achieve each school’s unique educational mission.”

In addition to the larger Holistic Review Initiative underway from the AAMC, it’s worth noting that the AMCAS application was updated earlier this year to include questions about the educational background and socioeconomic status of each student’s parents; this information is expected to help facilitate the recruitment of a diverse class of incoming medical students. There seems to be agreement that more must be done to increase the number of matriculating medical students from groups underrepresented in medicine and from educationally disadvantaged backgrounds, but for the time being students should not expect major shifts to race-based admissions policies to medical school – at least not due to the Fisher case. However, the issue will continue to develop as a second affirmative action case, Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action, is up for review by the court this fall.