Harvard affirmative action (SCOTUS) by Dec 31, 2023?

Harvard affirmative action (SCOTUS) by Dec 31, 2023?

$197,263 vol

ALL

Universal ban on race-conscious admissions

Yes

Universal ban on race-conscious admissions

Yes

Ban on Harvard’s race-conscious admissions

No

Ban on Harvard’s race-conscious admissions

No

Market Rules

Universal ban on race-conscious admissions

The outcome is The Court’s decision to reverse the judgments of the Court of Appeals for the First Circuit and of the District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, holding that the “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,” is a “complete” victory for the petitioners and not a “partial” victory. As described in the Payout Criterion, a “complete” victory is a ruling that institutions of higher education that receive federal financial assistance cannot use race as a factor in admissions to institutions of higher education that receive federal funding. A “partial” victory is a ruling that certain uses of race as a factor in admissions schemes that include those of Harvard College are impermissible and does not rule that institutions of higher education that receive federal financial assistance cannot use race as a factor in admissions at all. The Court both ruled against Harvard and UNC’s practices and prohibited using race as a factor in admissions for institutions that receive federal financial assistance. This is a “complete” victory. The Court concluded that “nothing in this opinion should be construed as prohibiting universities from considering an applicant’s discussion of how race affected his or her life, be it through discrimination, inspiration, or otherwise.” However, this would not be using race as a factor, it would be using race to discuss and promote other, permissible considerations (e.g. leadership, persistence). The Court specifically cautioned that “universities may not simply establish through application essays or other means the regime we hold unlawful today. (A dissenting opinion is generally not the best source of legal advice on how to comply with the majority opinion.)” and that “the prohibition against racial discrimination is ‘levelled at the thing, not the name … In other words, the student must be treated based on his or her experiences as an individual—not on the basis of race.” The court punts on the question of whether military academies might have a separate compelling interest/tailored means. Academies are also financed by the government directly rather than Department of Education federal financial assistance. They are therefore not included in the Payout Criterion. The Court emphasized - not once or twice, but multiple times and throughout its ruling - that, rather than merely the peculiarities of Harvard/UNC’s practices being impermissible, race for the sake of race cannot be used as a factor in college admissions going forward. This is a “complete” victory.

Resolves Yes if the Supreme Court ruling in Students for Fair Admissions Inc. v President & Fellows of Harvard College is a complete victory for the plaintiffs (Students for Fair Admissions Inc.).Outcome verified from Supreme Court.

A ruling is considered a complete victory for the plaintiffs if and only if it rules that institutions of higher education that receive federal financial assistance cannot use race as a factor in admissions to institutions of higher education that receive federal funding.

A ruling is considered a partial victory for the plaintiffs if and only if it rules that certain uses of race as a factor in admissions schemes that include those of Harvard College are impermissible (either on constitutional or statutory grounds) but does not rule that institutions of higher education that receive federal financial assistance cannot use race as a factor in admissions at all.

Please note that these two options are mutually exclusive. A complete victory means that it is not a partial victory. The market will close and expire at the sooner of the first 10:00 AM following the release of the Supreme Court's ruling in the aforementioned case, or December 31, 2024.

Please see SFFA in the Rulebook for the complete legally binding terms and conditions. The Rulebook also contains a helpful table with possible rulings and whether that counts for "partial" or "complete". All market participants should familiarize themselves with the Rulebook before participating in the market.

Note: this event is mutually exclusive.

Timeline and payout

Market openMar 31, 2022 · 10:00am EDT

Market closedJun 30, 2023 · 10:45am EDT

Paid outJun 30, 2023 · 1:45pm EDT

SeriesKXSFFA

EventSFFA

MarketSFFA-COMPLETE

Insider trading is prohibited

The following are prohibited from trading this contract:

Persons who are employed by any of the Source Agencies are not permitted to trade on the Contract.
Persons who hold any material, non-public information on the Underlying are not permitted to trade on the Contract.

Universal ban on race-conscious admissions

Dollars

Odds

0% chance

Max payout

Harvard affirmative action (SCOTUS) by Dec 31, 2023?

Harvard affirmative action (SCOTUS) by Dec 31, 2023?

Yes

Yes

No

No

Market Rules

Universal ban on race-conscious admissions

$0