That June 29 ruling specifically targeted Harvard and the University of North Carolina and how those institutions used race in their admissions processes, Politico reports. Chief Justice John Roberts authored the majority opinion, noting that “both programs lack sufficiently focused and measurable objectives warranting the use of race, unavoidably employ race in a negative manner, involve racial stereotyping, and lack meaningful end points.”

“We have never permitted admissions programs to work in that way, and we will not do so today,” he wrote.

While that ruling focused strictly on higher education, a likely consequence could be a big hit to future talent pools if fewer people of color are admitted to colleges, Rob Buelow, a public health professional who serves as head of product for the education sector at technology company Vector Solutions, told the Society for Human Resource Management.

“One of the fundamental values of higher education is preparing students to be successful in their careers and communities,” Buelow said. “Anything that impacts college access among historically underrepresented communities can exacerbate gaps in employment, skills and advancement opportunities.”

Nika White, a leadership consultant and DE&I expert in Greenville, S.C., said the court’s ruling “jeopardizes workplace diversity if employers lean towards hiring individuals from majority groups instead of practicing intentionality to attract and recruit historically underrepresented groups.”

Michelle Crockett, chief diversity officer at legal firm Miller Canfield in Washington, D.C., however, doesn’t foresee the ruling immediately causing employers to revamp their DE&I efforts. She cites Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibiting employers from factoring race when it comes to recruiting, hiring, promotion or termination. “In other words, it will still be permissible for employers to cast wide nets to identify qualified diverse applicants and to put specific measures in place to ensure that all employees have the tools necessary to compete for various employment opportunities,” Crockett said.

But the prospect of the court striking down affirmative action was enough for more than 80 major corporations and companies last summer to file three briefs supporting higher education’s use of these programs and as being good for business, NPR reports. “Experience in a diverse university environment prepares students to interact with and serve racially diverse client and customer bases and to work with people of all backgrounds,” notes one brief written by over 60 prominent businesses, including Apple, General Electric, Google and Johnson & Johnson. “The result is a business community more aligned with the public, increased profits, and business success.”

In another amicus brief in support of affirmative action, the HR Policy Association informed the court that “the increasing demand of American companies for educated, trained, diverse talent necessitates a continuous pipeline of such talent from college campuses around the United States,” Human Resource Executive reports. Solidifying that pipeline “requires admissions processes that provide opportunities for students of all backgrounds to achieve a higher education,” the group noted, adding that a negative ruling on affirmative action could “diminish” those opportunities.

Janet Albert, partner at Bridge Partners, noted the ruling will make it “more challenging” for all sectors that prioritize diversity and inclusion in their recruitment process. Melanie Naranjo, vice president of people at compliance training platform Ethena, urges employers to find ways to ensure their DEI efforts remain strong. “For employers, “it means they’re going to have to work even harder to understand the systemic biases at play in the workplace and find new ways to counteract them,” Naranjo said.