On December 4, the Supreme Court will hear arguments in two significant affirmative-action cases. Each case--one from Seattle and the other from Louisville--involves the constitutional validity of school-district plans that consider race in assigning students to public schools. Determined parents from both cities will ask the court to declare the assignment plans unconstitutional and, in the process, to abandon or modify legal principles articulated three years ago in two landmark affirmative-action cases involving the University of Michigan: "Grutter v. Bollinger" and "Gratz v. Bollinger." In this article, the author examines why these two cases could be a threat to the "four essential freedoms" of higher education. The four essential freedoms of an educational institution are the following: (1) To determine for itself on academic grounds who may teach; (2) What may be taught; (3) How it shall be taught; and (4) Who may be admitted to study. The author also discusses the intrusion of courts and legislatures to academic decision making and explains the three broad areas in which efforts to regulate colleges are likely to accelerate. These three broad areas are: (1) National security and the fight against terrorism; (2) Accountability through assessment; and (3) Tuition increases. The author concludes by giving recommendations which colleges must consider in order to minimize government intrusion in areas central to their teaching and research mission.