We recently posted a preview of the non-jury bench trial between Students for Fair Admissions, the group that won the U.S. Supreme Court case against Harvard and UNC that outlawed affirmative action at civilian universities, and the United States Naval Academy:
We noted in that report that this was potentially a huge case:
The Naval Academy trial is scheduled for two weeks of testimony every day, all day, with SFFA presenting testimony from 18 potential witnesses, and the Naval Academy presenting testimony from as many as 15 witnesses. In addition, SFFA intends to call four “experts” who presumable will testify as to why it is improper for the Naval Academy to use race in admissions, while the Naval Academy intends to use eight witnesses, who will testify to the opposite.SFFA also intends to offer up to 613 trail exhibits, or pieces of physical evidence, including various documents, at the trial, and the Academy intends to offer up to 209 of such documents in its defense of race-based admissions.You can review all of this in the Parties’ 80-page Joint Proposed Pretrial Order, available here.The trial is going to be a massive undertaking by all hands.
Oral recordings of the court proceedings were not and are not available, but reporting after the first day presented some good summaries and quotations of the Parties’ opening arguments, as we covered: Naval Academy Affirmative Action Trial Day One in the Books:
[D]ay one of the bench trial is in the books, as reported by Maryland’s Daily Record: Affirmative action trial against Naval Academy begins in Baltimore:
A retired Air Force general testified that racial diversity mattered “not one bit” to the military’s effectiveness on the first day of a trial challenging the U.S. Naval Academy’s admissions policies.The first witness to testify in the case was retired Brig. Gen. Christopher Walker, who was called by the plaintiff, anti-affirmative action group Students For Fair Admissions.“Racial diversity has little to nothing to do with the lethality and effectiveness of our armed forces,” said Walker, who is Black. He said he was always the only Black person or one of the only ones during any assignment, but that it didn’t matter.When he was stationed in Baghdad, for example, “I was concerned with who was a good driver and who was a good shooter.”But an attorney for the Naval Academy argued that diversity in the military is critical to national security, and that Black and Hispanic Midshipmen remain underrepresented.“Diversity is a strategic imperative,” said Joshua Gardner, a lawyer for the U.S. Department of Justice who is representing the Academy.The bench trial, over which U.S. District Court Judge Richard Bennett is presiding, is scheduled to last two weeks but could spill into a third.
We don’t know what happened after the first day, but we do know that the trial went more than eight full days, an eternity in federal court, and the trial was completed on Thursday, September 26, as reported in the Baltimore Banner: The Naval Academy’s affirmative action trial is over. What’s next?
The future of the U.S. Naval Academy’s admissions process is now in the hands of a federal judge.After a nearly two-week-long trial in a Baltimore district courtroom, Judge Richard Bennett will weigh whether the Annapolis-based military school will be allowed to continue considering race when selecting students — a practice it has said is already very limited. Students for Fair Admissions, the group that won landmark cases against Harvard and the University of North Carolina last year, sued the Naval Academy, alleging that its efforts to boost minority enrollment discriminate against white applicants and violate their Fifth Amendment rights to equal protection.Bennett, appointed to the bench in 2003 by President George W. Bush, said he would likely issue a decision within six to seven weeks — early to mid-November. An appeal to the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals could follow.
I would modify the last statement to say that an appeal to the Fourth Circuit will follow. And there will be the inevitable request for the U.S. Supreme Court to take the case.
But the Baltimore Banner provides a good summary of the lawyers’ wrap-up arguments:
During a nearly hour-long closing argument Thursday morning, plaintiff’s attorney Patrick Strawbridge contended racial classifications say “nothing about who you are” or “how you represent your country.”“Heroism…does not depend on someone’s race,” he said, drawing on his experience as the son of a Naval captain and the father of a service member.Strawbridge argued the Naval Academy could not articulate a clear reason for why it uses race in its admissions, nor had it adequately considered alternatives to race-conscious admissions policies. He added that “there are no real studies or evidence” that diversity improves a military’s lethality or effectiveness.Strawbridge accused the Naval Academy of “balancing” the number of applicants it admits from racial groups each year, noting the U.S. Supreme Court struck down Harvard’s admissions policies for the same reason. That ruling did not apply to military colleges.In response, Department of Justice lawyers said the Naval Academy is different from the civilian universities at the center of the Supreme Court case because of its role in defending the nation and producing military leaders. Approximately 40% of senior Naval officers are graduates of the Naval Academy, defense attorney Catherine Yang said during a 45-minute closing argument.“The plaintiff has tried to fit this case within the Harvard box…but the military context is unique,” Yang said.Yang argued that diversity is a “national security imperative” because militaries are more effective when they reflect a diversity of experiences and backgrounds. “The military’s No. 1 asset,” she said, “is its people.”Yang said it was “offensive and baseless” to suggest the Naval Academy was lowering its standards to admit minority applicants. She added that the Naval Academy “absolutely does not use race in isolation” when making admissions decisions and said there are many aspects of the admissions process where race is not a consideration.Without race-conscious admissions policies, Yang warned minority enrollment at the Naval Academy would fall.
The Banner also noted some personal aspects of the case:
Following closing arguments, Bennett commended both sides for how they handled proceedings on a polarizing topic. The public “should take great comfort” in the civility each side displayed, he said.Throughout proceedings, attorneys frequently referred to the other side as “my friend.”“This may be a highlight of your careers,” Bennett added before the lawyers shook each other’s hands. “…You all should be very proud.”
We’ll keep tabs on whether there are any post-trial motions, hearings, or other actions and report back.
And of course we will have compete analysis of the Court’s ruling, however it comes out, and preview the sure-to-be-filed appeal.
CLICK HERE FOR FULL VERSION OF THIS STORY