The Massachusetts Institute of Technology recently disclosed the racial data pertaining to the 1,102 members of its inbound class of 2028.

The statistics are noteworthy because they hint at the broader impact of the U.S. Supreme Court's June 29, 2023, decision in Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. Harvard/UNC banning race-based college admissions.

Some individuals on and off campus who apparently prefer student selection on the basis of dermal pigmentation are less than pleased with the new merit-based results. After all, favored racial groups have seen a dip in representation while others have seen a slight increase.

MSNBC talking head Ayman Mohyeldin framed the shake-up on his Saturday show accordingly: "MIT released some data that confirmed our worst fears about the Supreme Court. The university's incoming class will be significantly less diverse than in previous years, and that's thanks to last year's ruling that gutted affirmative action."

According to the university's admissions page, 1% of the class of 2028 is American Indian or Alaskan Native; 47% is Asian-American; 5% is black; 11% is Hispanic; less than 1% is Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander; and 37% is white. The numbers don't add up to 100% as some students identified with more than one group.

'The student must be treated based on his or her experiences as an individual — not on the basis of race.'

As compared with the composite profile averaging the demographic composition of the previous four MIT first-year classes, Asians students are up six percentage points; American Indian students are down one point; black students are down eight points; Hispanic students are down four points; white students are down one point; and Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander students are down roughly one point.

Like Mohyeldin, MIT president Sally Kornbluth is apparently prickled by the racial breakdown of her own university's admissions choices.

Kornbluth noted in an Aug. 21 letter to members of the university community, "I let you know that we expected the ruling to pose a serious challenge to sustaining, in future classes, the diverse mix of students who make MIT the place it is today. Now that the Class of 2028 has enrolled, the impact is clear, and it is concerning."

On June 29, 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 6-2 in Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. Harvard/UNC that the race-based admissions processes at Harvard University and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill could not be reconciled with the guarantees of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

"Both programs lack sufficiently focused and measurable objectives warranting the use of race, unavoidably employ race in a negative manner, involve racial stereotyping, and lack meaningful end points," Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. noted, writing for the majority.

"The student must be treated based on his or her experiences as an individual — not on the basis of race. Many universities have for too long done just the opposite. And in doing so, they have concluded, wrongly, that the touchstone of an individual's identity is not challenges bested, skills built, or lessons learned but the color of their skin," continued Roberts. "Our constitutional history does not tolerate that choice."

Justice Sonia Sotomayor suggested in her dissenting opinion that by scrapping race-based admissions, the court was "further entrenching racial inequality in education."

Edward Blum, the president of SFFA, said of the ruling in a statement, "This ruling is a long-overdue monumental step forward in our nation’s pursuit of a truly fair and unbiased educational system. It affirms the principle that every student should have an equal opportunity to succeed based on their hard work and talents."

Stu Schmill, MIT's dean of admissions, told the campus paper, "As a baseline, in recent years around 25% of our enrolling undergraduate students have identified as Black, Hispanic, and/or Native American and Pacific Islander. For the incoming Class of 2028, that number is about 16%."

Although the demographic change has Kornbluth concerned, Schmill noted that "this cohort is no more or less prepared to excel in our curriculum than other recent classes that were more broadly diverse."

Despite admitting to lacking racial data on applicants this year, Schmill said he has "no doubt that we left out many well-qualified, well-matched applicants from historically under-represented backgrounds who in the past we would have admitted — and who would have excelled."

Schmill insinuated that MIT is thinking outside the box on how it can maximize "diversity" where its incoming first-year classes are concerned. For instance, the admissions office will consider "prospective fields of study and areas of research, extracurricular activities and accomplishments, as well as economic, geographic, and educational background."

"To be clear, there is no quick and easy 'hack' to solve for racial inequality," continued Schmill. "But MIT does not shrink from hard problems in science or in society, and we will do what we can, within the bounds of the law, to continue to deliver an exceptionally rigorous and inclusive educational experience."

Eddie Glaude Jr., a professor of African-American studies at Princeton University, told MSNBC that the elimination of race-based admissions is part of a "two-front assault," noting that DEI is also under attack.

"So even if you get admitted to these institutions, they're attacking DEI offices so that the experience is not, shall we say, as welcoming, as supportive as it might be," said Glaude. "So I think institutions need to live their values and not be afraid of being sued — bring the full weight of their reputation to bear in the fight for diverse higher educational landscape."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!