Supreme Court to Review Montgomery County Magnet Admissions Policy

The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear *Association for Education Fairness v. Montgomery County Board of Education*, a lawsuit challenging the county’s magnet-program admissions process for middle-school students. The case, originally filed in 2020 by the Association for Education Fairness (AFEF), alleges that the county’s lottery system, which incorporates school-level poverty metrics, discriminates against Asian American applicants in violation of the Equal Protection Clause.

Reason

Montgomery County, Maryland, altered its magnet-program selection in the 2021-22 school year, moving from test-score-based admissions to a lottery that first places high-achieving students in a pool determined by the socioeconomic status of their schools. The change followed pressure from community groups, including the NAACP and CASA Inc., over the underrepresentation of Black and Latino students. A federal district judge dismissed the complaint in 2022, finding that Asian American students comprised a larger share of admitted students than of the applicant pool and that accounting for economic disparities was permissible. The Fourth Circuit upheld that dismissal, citing precedent that requires plaintiffs to show a disproportionate impact on the racial group as a whole.

Reason

AFEF contends that because Asian American students are concentrated in higher-performing, lower-poverty schools, the poverty-based eligibility threshold creates a higher barrier for them, reducing their admission share. The county argues the policy is race-neutral and aims to address economic inequities. Lower courts have been split on whether plaintiffs must demonstrate aggregate disparate impact or whether harm to individual students suffices to proceed.

Reason

Montgomery County maintains that the lottery system is facially neutral and designed to promote equity across socioeconomic lines. The Pacific Legal Foundation (PLF), representing AFEF, argues that the Constitution protects students as individuals and that a district should not evade discrimination claims by showing limited aggregate harm to a racial group.

Reason

• “The Constitution protects students as individuals, not as members of a racial group. A school district should not be able to defeat a discrimination claim by showing that its policy did not harm enough Asian American children. Every family deserves admissions rules that judge their child on their own merit.” — Attorney Chris Kieser, PLF senior attorney

Reason