Medical schools 'skirting' SCOTUS ruling rejecting race in admissions: report

DNH says it "represents physicians, nurses, medical students, patients, and policymakers" in an effort to keep "identity politics out of medical education, research, and clinical practice." The organization had previously released a report where they found "many in the healthcare establishment nevertheless remain ideologically committed to the principle of racial favoritism and reject the virtue of race blindness" despite the high court ruling. 

The newly published data, titled "Skirting SCOTUS: How medical schools will continue to practice racially conscious admissions," used both MCAT data and available admissions data. DNH noted that because AAMC does not publish school-level data, it is not "immediately clear" which medical schools are continuing to implement affirmative action and to what extent. The data also excludes public universities in states where affirmative action was already banned.

"Among the thirteen schools that published clear racial/ethnic demographic data for the class of 2027 and 2028, four experienced an increase in the proportion of black or Hispanic students," the report states. 

"Fidelity to SFFA is not only measured by year-to-year demographic changes but is also a function of the degree to which affirmative action informed admissions policies before SFFA," the report continues.

The report states if the penalty assigned to "white and Asian applicants was modest," the demographic change would be reflected as such and vice versa. 

"That fact, in conjunction with the reality that black and Hispanic matriculants to medical schools have significantly lower GPAs and MCAT scores than other matriculants, is a signal that the schools continue to penalize or reward students on the basis of race," the report states. 

"It's pretty shocking and appalling how flagrantly some of these medical schools are ducking a Supreme Court ban on affirmative action," Ian Kingsbury, research director at DNH, told Fox News Digital. "You can see it in the data, and then you can tie that data to the statements that the schools themselves are making, where they're publicly rebuking the Supreme Court and where they're talking about the importance of diversity in their admissions process."

"Whether the decision to stop publishing data after SFFA is coincidental, a gesture to disguise improper implementation of SFFA, or an effort to hide the statistical reality associated with proper implementation, is unclear," the report continued. "Given pressure from the AAMC to continue to racially discriminate, coupled with the reality that many medical schools have been captured by far-left ideologues, these schools - as well as the dozens of others that didn't publish any data - do not automatically earn a presumption of innocence."

"The sort of sobering reality is that, unfortunately, for the time being, Students for Fair Admissions has not resolved the issue of racial discrimination in higher education," Kingsbury said. "And there's more work to be done."

The justices decided two separate legal challenges over just how Harvard University - a private institution - and the University of North Carolina - a public one - decide who fills their classrooms.

Fox News Digital reached out to AAMC, Quinnipiac University, University of Maryland, University of Chicago, and Duke University for additional comment.

AAMC directed Fox News Digital to its most recent data publication on medical school applicants and enrollment in 2024. 

"We are encouraged by the increase in first-time applicants to medical school. The AAMC and its member medical schools are committed to continuing our efforts to increase the supply of physicians and to increase the range of backgrounds and experiences in the applicant and matriculant pools that are critical to the future physician workforce. Evidence shows that a more varied workforce can improve access to health care and the health of our communities," David J. Skorton, MD, AAMC president and CEO, said in the statement.