The prediction was that in the Students for Fair Admissions (SFFA) cases against Harvard and UNC, the Supreme Court in 2023 would strike down the existing race-based affirmative action admissions policies at those schools as unconstitutional, in a way framed as a win for Asian American applicants.

What actually happened:

• On June 29, 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College and the companion UNC case.
• The Court’s majority held that the race-conscious admissions programs at Harvard and UNC violated the Equal Protection Clause (and, for Harvard, Title VI) and therefore were unconstitutional. (supreme.justia.com)
• News and university reports uniformly describe this as the Court striking down race-conscious/affirmative action admissions programs at Harvard and UNC. (theguardian.com)
• The cases were brought by SFFA on behalf of Asian American plaintiffs, arguing that the policies harmed Asian American applicants; the Court’s ruling agreed with SFFA that such race-based systems are impermissible, and the outcome has been widely characterized as a victory for SFFA and the Asian American applicants it represented, even though the Court did not separately find intentional anti–Asian American animus. (thecrimson.com)

The central factual claim—that the Court would strike down those race-based admissions policies as unconstitutional in 2023 in the SFFA v. Harvard/UNC cases—is exactly what occurred. The more rhetorical part (“discriminate against Asian Americans”) matches the plaintiffs’ framing that the majority essentially accepted (that using race in this way is unlawful discrimination), even though the Court sidestepped a specific finding of intentional anti-Asian bias.

Given that, the prediction is best classified as right.