Penn's policy of factoring race into admissions decisions was upheld this summer when the Supreme Court defended the use of affirmative action in higher education.
On June 23, the Court declared the University of Michigan's Law School admissions policy, which factors race into its decisions, to be constitutional.
However, it found Michigan's undergraduate "point system" -- which automatically awards underrepresented minorities 20 of the 100 points needed for "guaranteed" admission -- unconstitutional.
According to Admissions Dean Lee Stetson, Penn hopefuls will feel no repercussions in light of the Court's ruling against Michigan's undergraduate admissions program.
Stetson said that Penn -- which signed an amicus curiae, or friend of the court, brief submitted to the Court in support of Michigan -- does not use a point system in its admissions policies, though it does take race into account when admitting students.
"Race is only one element that we consider along with many other elements of a student's total background," Stetson said. "As the Supreme Court reaffirmed, [race] can be considered, just not the exclusive."
The dean added that he is "pleased" that the Court has reaffirmed Penn's, and numerous other college's, admission policies since those policies lead to a "nice increase in students from all walks of life."
Also, Stetson made it clear that a minority student would never "steal" another student's spot in the class.
"There are so many variables that we're not choosing one student over another," Stetson said. Instead, he added, the admissions officers are merely working to "sculpt a class" in which there are students of many different ethnic backgrounds.
University President Judith Rodin also added her support of the decision, noting that it allows colleges to "construct their classes in a way that enables them to fulfill their educational mission... [by providing] diversity and broad opportunity."
College senior Nicolas Rodriquez, spokesman for the Latino Coalition, noted that he was "happy with the law school decision that race does matter."
The decision "acknowledged that race is an issue and a concern that we must address and not ignore," Rodriquez said.
However, Rodriquez also voiced his agreement with the Court's ruling on Michigan's undergraduate admissions point system.
"You can't just look at numbers," Rodriquez said. "You also have to look at the character of people both of color and not of color."
Rodriquez added that affirmative action should not be considered "a helping hand for people who are unqualified."
"The students that come to this University, no matter what background, color or gender, are all equally qualified," Rodriquez said. "They may be qualified in different ways, but they are all equally qualified."
But not all students have been singing the praises of the Court's rulings.
College junior and College Republicans Chairman Daniel Gomez said that he does not think the Court upheld the Constitution at all in their graduate school ruling.
This case "sets the precedent that the Constitution somehow changes with time," Gomez said. "They're saying that equal protection can be suspended until certain social goals are met."
Gomez added that his Latino descent in no way changes his views on affirmative action -- in fact, it only makes them stronger.
"I feel that affirmative action is rather derogatory," Gomez said. "It's extremely patronizing."
Wharton junior and former College Republicans Chairman David Copley complained that the Supreme Court's decision was "not a major victory for any side."
"I thought it was very disappointing," said Copley, a former Daily Pennsylvanian columnist. "The Justice tried to straddle the middle and please both sides."
Copley also said he feels a better solution to the affirmative action debate would be if admissions took economic factors into account, rather than just skin color.
"Not all minority kids are disadvantaged," Copley said, adding that, on the flip side, there are also non-minorities who face economic challenges, but are overlooked by the current affirmative action implementation.
