Harvard University is on trial for allegedly discriminating against Asian-American applicants. The Students for Fair Admissions, an Asian-American group led by conservative pundit Edward Blum, claims Harvard follows discriminatory admissions practices by holding Asian-Americans to a higher standard than students of other races.
The group claims Harvard systematically ranks Asian-Americans lower in the “personal rating” section which, in turn, caps the number of academically accepted Asian-American students. According to NPR, Harvard denied this claim. The suit will rely partly on a 2013 study prepared by Harvard’s Office of Institutional Research, which found that “being Asian-American was negatively associated with being admitted,” according to The New York Times.
Depending on the broadness or vagueness of the judges’ decision, this suit could lead to sweeping changes in the long-held and highly-politicized subject of affirmative action. A vague holding would impact only Harvard admissions, whereas a broad holding could reshape the future of affirmative action. If the case is not decided at the trial level, it will almost certainly find its way to the Supreme Court.
Students for Fair Admissions aim to prevent Harvard from considering race in its admissions process. Harvard responded by arguing that “eliminating race as a factor would cause an unacceptable decline in diversity,” according to The New York Times.
Harvard University has long used affirmative action as part of its admissions process, though at its onset, the concept held a different connotation. Affirmative action, initially an executive order signed into law by President John F. Kennedy in 1961, aimed to “increase the amount of people from historically underrepresented groups (like African-Americans at the time) employed by government contractors,” according to NPR. Since then, the policy has been co-opted by elite universities with the intent of emphasizing minority representation in the nation’s most selective schools.
The United States has a long history of allowing minorities to be underrepresented in the country’s leadership. This trend shines a spotlight on the systematic disenfranchisement these groups receive, often within the academic community. African-Americans and other minority groups often work twice as hard in life as their white counterparts. Affirmative action aims to alleviate these disadvantages by designing an environment that allows minorities to be represented in elite (often Ivy League) schools that have long histories of racial discrimination.
Those who do not favor affirmative action claim that it is a way to discriminate, echoing the “I don’t see color” excuse for racism. By resorting to arguments like these, opponents of affirmative action effectively disregard all the years of racism and discrimination within the world of higher education and the U.S. in general.
This lawsuit was initially filled in 2014 and finally made its way to trial last month. The trial still rages on, but a decision is expected soon.
While the case is about alleged discrimination in Harvard’s admissions process on the surface, many see it has a sneakily-disguised way to challenge the legality of affirmative action.
Maggy McDonel 