A student challenged the University of Texas at Austin’s race-conscious admissions program under the Equal Protection Clause. The university used a race-neutral admissions process for most seats and considered race as one factor in a smaller process designed to achieve the educational benefits of diversity. The district court and the Fifth Circuit upheld the program, and the Supreme Court had previously remanded for a more careful application of strict scrutiny. On the second review, the Supreme Court affirmed. The Court held that a university receives some, but not complete, judicial deference in identifying educational goals and determining whether race-neutral alternatives suffice. The record showed that the university had engaged in a reasoned, ongoing evaluation and that its limited consideration of race was narrowly tailored to its diversity objectives. The Court emphasized that its decision addressed the program and record before it, not every race-conscious admissions policy. Justice Thomas and Justice Alito dissented, arguing that the program failed strict scrutiny and that the university had not shown a constitutionally sufficient need to consider race.