Affirmative action is no more. Yesterday, the Supreme Court struck down the use of race as a factor in college admissions at Harvard University and the University of North Carolina (UNC). In a decision with huge implications for higher education, the court found that such practices violate the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment.  

This ruling ignores legal precedent, public sentiment and reality. It will particularly affect Latinos, the country’s largest racial/ethnic minority group. The end of affirmative action will limit the ability of Latinos to access selective colleges and attain economic mobility. Sadly, the decision shows how out of touch the court is with our increasingly diverse society. 

Affirmative action has been transformational in enabling Latinos to escape poverty, improve their communities and move towards equality with other Americans. But Chief Justice John Roberts dismisses it, writing in his majority opinion: “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 … the color of their skin.” 

His assertion is not true. Colleges like Harvard and UNC use multiple metrics to evaluate prospective students, including geographic location, extracurricular activities, gender and family connections to the institution. Race/ethnic background is one of many factors that go into the admissions process.  

What is true is that the court’s decision brushes aside decades of precedent. In 1978, the Supreme Court held that universities could consider race as a factor in admissions. In 2003, the court allowed the use of race in admissions, so long as it was done in a narrowly tailored way. In 2016, the justices again found that using race, among other factors, in college admissions was constitutionally permissible. The high court has repeatedly rejected the argument that using race in college admissions violated the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment, which was the claim of the petitioners in the Harvard/UNC cases. 

Rather than being grounded in the law, this ruling is another partisan action by a court that is mired in ethical scandals and held in low public esteem. 

This decision will have a tremendous impact on Latinos. One in four U.S. children is Latino, and by 2030 Latinos are projected to be nearly one-third of the nation’s K-12 students. This growing population will now find it harder to access top institutions of higher learning, meaning it will be harder for them to obtain leadership positions in business, the military and the public sector. Even with affirmative action, a 2017 New York Times analysis found that Latinos were more underrepresented at top colleges than 35 years earlier.   

The court’s ruling also flies in the face of public opinion, which has been trending in favor of affirmative action for 10 years. In an April poll, NBC News found that 53 percent of Americans said that affirmative action is still needed. Among Latinos, this figure was 68 percent. It’s no wonder that an array of Latino advocacy groups support affirmative action. These groups recognize that race-conscious policies are one way to alleviate systemic inequality. 

Justice Sonia Sotomayor got it right in her dissent noting, “Ignoring race will not equalize a society that is racially unequal. What was true in the 1860s, and again in 1954, is true today: Equality requires acknowledgment of inequality.” 

Affirmative action is, perhaps, an imperfect tool to help narrow the educational attainment gap between whites and Latinos. Yet it is a necessary one. Consider that in California, after a 1996 ballot initiative banned affirmative action in education, Latinos and other students of color suffered. Following the ban, more students of color enrolled at less selective institutions and were less likely to get college degrees, graduate degrees or jobs in the STEM fields. And in court briefs, Harvard argued that taking race out of its admissions process would reduce enrollment of Latino students at the school from 14 percent to 9 percent. 

With its affirmative action ruling, the Supreme Court has shown a disappointing lack of vision for our country’s future. It is ironic that the court’s six conservative justices — who hold a total of nine Ivy League degrees — seem intent on keeping Latinos from accessing the educational advantages and privileges that they themselves enjoy.  

Raul A. Reyes is an attorney and contributor to CNN Opinion and NBC Latino. Follow him on Twitter at @RaulAReyes, Instagram at @raulareyes1.