The Trump administration has notched a significant victory in its push to reshape federal policies, striking a deal to eliminate race-based admissions at two of the nation’s premier military academies. This move signals a broader intent to prioritize merit over identity in government institutions.

According to The Washington Times, the Justice Department announced a settlement ensuring that the Military Academy at West Point and the Air Force Academy will select students solely based on merit. The agreement marks a sharp departure from previous policies that factored race into admissions decisions.

This settlement, brokered under President Trump’s directive, aligns with his ongoing mission to dismantle diversity, equity, and inclusion frameworks across federal agencies. It’s a clear message that individual achievement, not demographic checkboxes, should define opportunity in institutions as critical as our military academies.

Legal Battles and Policy Shifts Take Center Stage

The roots of this change trace back to legal challenges by Students for Fair Admissions, the group behind the 2023 Supreme Court victory that largely dismantled affirmative action in higher education. Their lawsuits targeted military academies to test whether race-based policies could withstand scrutiny even in contexts of national security.

While the Biden administration defended these preferences, arguing for the necessity of a diverse officer corps, the Trump administration reversed course upon taking office. The result was a swift settlement, dismissing the cases with a firm commitment to merit-based standards.

Attorney General Pam Bondi hailed the agreement, stating, “We are proud to partner with the Department of Defense to permanently end race-based admissions at West Point and the Air Force Academy.” Her words underscore a belief that true equality lies in judging candidates by their qualifications alone, not by arbitrary traits.

Supreme Court’s Nuance Sparks Continued Debate

The Supreme Court’s 2023 ruling, which struck down race-based admissions in most colleges by a 6-3 vote, left a deliberate carve-out for military academies due to their unique role in national defense. Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. noted in a footnote that the issue remained unaddressed, hinting at potential distinct interests for these institutions.

Advocates for affirmative action, including Justice Sonia Sotomayor in her dissent, warned that scrapping race considerations could disrupt military cohesion across ranks. Yet, this argument seems to falter when weighed against the principle of equal treatment under the law, which should not bend for expediency.

Edward Blum, president of Students for Fair Admissions, celebrated the settlement as “a historic day for the principle of equal treatment under the law at our nation’s military academies.” His resolve to refile if policies backslide shows that the fight for fairness isn’t just a one-time win but a sustained commitment.

Earlier Settlements Pave the Way for Change

This isn’t the first military academy to face such a reckoning, as a similar lawsuit against the Naval Academy was settled earlier this year under Trump’s broader push to eliminate race or sex preferences in the armed forces. That case, too, ended with a dismissal after the Justice Department intervened to uphold merit over identity.

A federal judge had initially upheld the Naval Academy’s policies in December, citing a “compelling national security interest in a diverse officer corps.” But such reasoning often masks a deeper reluctance to trust that merit alone can build a capable and unified military.

Studies, like one by Zach Goldberg, revealed stark disparities at the Naval Academy, where a White applicant with a 5% admission chance would see odds jump to 50% if Black with identical scores. Numbers like these suggest a system less about readiness and more about engineered outcomes, a practice now firmly in the crosshairs.

A New Era of Merit in Military Leadership

As these settlements unfold, they reflect a growing consensus that America’s future military leaders must be chosen for their skills and dedication, not their background. The agreements, including the right to challenge any return to old policies, ensure this shift isn’t just symbolic but enduring.

President Trump’s order to purge DEI initiatives from federal operations, including the armed forces, speaks to a vision of governance untainted by preferential treatment. It’s a stance that resonates with those who believe strength comes from unity of purpose, not division by design.

Jay Clayton, U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, captured the spirit of this change, saying, “Today’s agreement ensures that our future military leaders will carry on the greatness that is born of opportunity, effort and a level playing field.” In a nation built on the promise of fairness, this settlement is a step toward ensuring that promise holds true even in the most vital of institutions.