Last Friday, the Education Department and the Justice Department issued a policy clarification document on the Fisher ruling stating that colleges could continue the use of race in admissions according to the status quo.
Dartmouth's admissions process is consistent with the Supreme Court's decision to permit affirmative action for the time being, Dean of Admissions and Financial Aid Maria Laskaris said.
"Our policies have not changed because the Fisher decision did not change the way that we can consider race in a holistic, individualized review process," Laskaris said. "The Departments of Education and Justice's letter released Friday essentially confirmed our understanding of the Supreme Court's decision."
The College does not apply quotas in the admissions process and recognizes every applicant as a unique individual, Laskaris said.
"We do not make assumptions that all students from particular backgrounds or particular states or particular interests will all be the same applicant," she said. "Every decision is based on our reading of the entirety of the student's application, which shares information to us about their background, their community, their perspectives and their experiences."
Over the past 10 years, minority students have comprised between 45 and 53 percent of each incoming class, according to the Dartmouth Fact Book.
After the 2011 Fifth Circuit ruling that upheld the university's affirmative action admission policy, Abigail Fisher petitioned the Supreme Court for certiorari. The Supreme Court vacated the lower court's ruling in June, sending the case back to the Fifth Circuit and reiterating that the university must demonstrate that "no workable race-neutral alternatives would produce the educational benefits of diversity."
Laskaris said Dartmouth regularly assesses its admissions processes and is in the early stages of reviewing its policies.
Government professor Sonu Bedi said the College's decision to maintain its current admissions policies is reasonable considering the Supreme Court ruling.
"The Fisher decision has not changed the status of the way the Court approaches these kinds of policies," Bedi said.
Previously expected to be a ground-breaking decision, the Fisher ruling allowed a variety of interpretations, from holding a stricter standard for affirmative action to keeping the status quo.
Bedi said controversies around affirmative action stem from different understandings of equality.
"If you think that equality means that laws have to be color or race-blind, then clearly that seems to be in conflict with race-based affirmative action," Bedi said, "But if you think that equality is not about color-blindness, but about anti-subordination, then affirmative action laws inform that principle."
Office of Pluralism and Leadership director Alysson Satterlund said in an email that diversity is critical to maintaining a balanced campus climate.
"Studying and living in a diverse academic community enhances social development, prepares students for leading, living and working in a global society," Satterlund said. "In my experience, we need many tools to address educational and social inequalities, and I support all efforts to realize this goal."
Data examined by Princeton sociologist Thomas Espenshade in his 2009 book "No Longer Separate, Not Yet Equal" showed that Asian-American students needed a 1550 on the old SAT scale to have the same chances of admittance to a top private university as white students who scored 1410 and black students who scored 1100.
In the 2003 case of Grutter v. Bollinger, the Supreme Court upheld the University of Michigan Law School's affirmative action admissions policy, since it did not result in a quota system.
The quota system was ruled unconstitutional in the 1978 case of Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, which upheld affirmative action in the absence of established quotas.
