在裁决中没有提到ED或EA，在我看来，这是一个单独的问题，需要在法庭上再次证明：提前申请是一种种族歧视。因此，现在的问题取决于大学是否倾向于取消提前申请，在这一裁决之后可能出现的公众舆论，以及是否有要求取消提前申请的呼声。
此外，根据哈佛的声明，他们将“遵守”，但由于他们自己在同一份声明中也承诺要实现多样性，我相信他们未来仍将努力录取一个多元化的班级。
最后，具体到纽约州的ED，纽约州曾有一项禁止ED的法案，但到目前为止还没有通过。也许这一裁决会激发人们对该法案的新兴趣，但还有待观察。根据该法案的当前版本，如果大学不顾该法案继续保留ED，将被罚款，罚款金额为上一届新生学杂费的10%。
原文：
There is no mention of early decision or early action in the ruling, and in my opinion it is a separate issue that would need to again be proven in court: that early applications are a form of racial discrimination. So now it depends on whether colleges are inclined to remove early applications and potentially public opinion following this ruling and whether there are calls for early applications to be removed.
Also，based on Harvard's statement, they will "comply" but as they themselves in the same statement launch into a commitment to diversity, I believe they will still make an effort to admit a diverse class going into the future.
Finally, regarding NY state ED specifically, there was a bill to ban ED in NY state, however, it has so far failed to pass. Perhaps this ruling will spark a new interest in the bill, but it remains to be seen. According to the current version of the bill, colleges would be fined for maintaining ED in spite of the bill, at a rate of 10% of the previous freshman class' tuition and fees.
