Fall brings a flurry of applications to our M.D., Ph.D. and master’s programs here at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine. It’s a busy and exciting time, as we begin to select our next class of matriculants.

But this season, something’s changed. In June, the Supreme Court severely limited the consideration of race in university admissions. Campuses nationwide now face newfound uncertainty regarding their selection processes, and Johns Hopkins is no exception.

Amid this reversal of long-standing legal precedent, I’ve reflected on the history made here. One of our earliest and most generous benefactors, Mary Elizabeth Garrett, established requisites for the medical school: a background in science and mathematics, a bachelor’s degree, and exams based on students’ coursework.

Garrett set these requirements to ensure Johns Hopkins admitted women on the same basis as men.

That was a good start, but as the practice of medicine has evolved since Johns Hopkins’ founding, so has medical education — and our ideas about what constitutes true equity. Over a century later, we have made strides accepting and graduating students from every race, ethnicity, religion, ability, gender identity and expression, and background.

That work must not — and will not — end because of the recent Supreme Court ruling. In fact, my top priority as the interim dean remains welcoming students who represent and understand the diverse communities who need their help.

Training those who have long been underrepresented in medicine — students of color, students with disabilities and students who grew up in rural areas or a lower income bracket — is essential to achieving health equity.

Through lived experience, they bring more clarity and empathy to our missions of patient care, research and discovery. They can ask thought-provoking questions, offer fresh perspectives and reflect the vast variety in our society.

As we witness across our health system every day, diverse teams get better results. They communicate more effectively. They think more creatively and find more innovative solutions. In our field, that translates to biomedical discoveries that benefit all human beings and improve care for every patient. 

Building these effective, empathetic teams starts in medical school. Here, students develop the cultural humility that will sustain them through their careers. Yes, it happens in lecture halls. But it also happens in study groups and social gatherings with classmates.

As students get to know one another and begin to live the ideals that brought them to medicine and science, their interactions shape how they care for future patients and think about the direction and impact of their scientific research. That’s the value of creating the widest possible world within our school.

Speaking personally, my skin color has afforded me advantages in my life and career. But I was also raised in public housing. I was the first person in my family to graduate from college. I feel incredibly fortunate for the opportunities that led me to Johns Hopkins. But I also recognize that not every person in my community was given the same chances. In fact, many of my Black and brown friends and neighbors did not have the same opportunities I did.

These experiences shaped who I am as a physician and scientist, and solidified my commitment to building a health care system that strives for equity. And I’m honored to lead an organization like the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine that shares and advocates for these beliefs.

The Supreme Court ruling may have severely limited a critical factor that we may consider for admissions. Yet even with — or, perhaps, despite — the decision, we remain committed to fostering our diversity and working for equity, inclusion and belonging, because a more representative health care system is a better health care system.