NEW YORK,NY- The Donald Trump administration is supporting Asian Americans who are suing the Ivy League Harvard University alleging it racially discriminates against them in admissions. “No American should be denied admission to school because of their race,” the Justice Department said in a document filed in a Massachusetts court on August 30 to back Asian Americans. “As a recipient of taxpayer dollars,
Harvard has a responsibility to conduct its admissions policy without racial discrimination by using meaningful admissions criteria that meet lawful requirements,” said the department headed by Attorney General Jeff Sessions.
The suit was filed in 2014 by Students for Fair Admissions on behalf of high-performing Asian students - a category that includes Indians - who allege that Harvard discriminates against them on the basis of their race. The case is scheduled to be taken up for trial in October.Either way it is decided, the case is expected to have wide repercussions for educational institutions across the US and impact affirmative action programs that are in theory geared to help certain disadvantaged minorities.
Harvard College, the undergraduate institution of the university that is at the center of the suit, is headed by an Indian American, Rakesh Khurana.
“We are deeply disappointed that the Department of Justice has taken the side of Edward Blum and Students for Fair Admissions, recycling the same misleading and hollow arguments that prove nothing more than the emptiness of the case against Harvard. This decision is not surprising given the highly irregular investigation the DOJ has engaged in thus far, and its recent action to repeal Obama-era guidelines on the consideration of race in admission,” the Harvard statement said.
“Harvard does not discriminate against applicants from any group, and will continue to vigorously defend the legal right of every college and university to consider race as one factor among many in college admissions, which the Supreme Court has consistently upheld for more than 40 years. Colleges and universities must have the freedom and flexibility to create the diverse communities that are vital to the learning experience of every student, and Harvard is proud to stand with the many organizations and individuals who are filing briefs in support of this position today,” the statement continued.
The university denies that its practices violate the law, saying that ethnicity is optional on the application and is one of many factors that contribute to getting into the college. In addition, it argues that having a diverse student body contributes to the educational process. All of the other Ivy League schools supported Harvard, court documents show.
The Justice Department also said in a statement that it had separately begun an investigation into Harvard’s admissions process last year based upon a complaint made to it by more than 60 Asian-American organizations.
The organisations that complained to the Justice Department include the Global Organization of Persons of Indian Origin, National Federation of Indian-American Associations, American Society of Engineers of Indian Origin, and BITS Sindri Alumni Association of North India. While under US court rulings universities can use broad criteria like economic status to ensure diversity in admissions, making race the sole factor in a system similar to caste-based reservations in India is illegal.
Although the programs for diversity at many universities are presented as progressive efforts to help historically oppressed minorities like African Americans and Latinos, it is the Whites who actually benefit at the expense of the Asians.
A study by a Princeton University academic found that to gain admission to elite universities, Asian-American students had to score 140 points more than whites in the Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT), which is a common entrance exam used by most universities.
The Justice Department said that “the students and parents who brought this (SFFA) suit have presented compelling evidence that Harvard’s use of race unlawfully discriminates against Asian Americans.”
An evidence that has emerged in the case is Harvard’s use of “personal ratings” that relies on racial and ethnic stereotypes to undermine Asians’ chances of admission. According to a court filing admissions officers were found to use “personal ratings” that gave lower ratings for Asians on subjective criteria like “others like to be around him or her”; has character traits such as “likability... helpfulness, courage, (and) kindness”; “is an attractive person to be with”; “is widely respected”; “is a good person” and “has good human qualities”. The Justice Department said that “the evidence shows that Harvard uses a ‘personal rating’ that may be biased against Asian Americans” because it “admits that, on average, it scores Asian-American applicants lower on this ‘personal rating’ than applicants of other races.” The university said in a court filing in June that it uses “whole person evaluation” and declared it “does not discriminate against applicants of any race including Asians.”
The suit was filed in 2014 by Students for Fair Admissions on behalf of high-performing Asian students - a category that includes Indians - who allege that Harvard discriminates against them on the basis of their race. The case is scheduled to be taken up for trial in October.Either way it is decided, the case is expected to have wide repercussions for educational institutions across the US and impact affirmative action programs that are in theory geared to help certain disadvantaged minorities.
Harvard College, the undergraduate institution of the university that is at the center of the suit, is headed by an Indian American, Rakesh Khurana.
“We are deeply disappointed that the Department of Justice has taken the side of Edward Blum and Students for Fair Admissions, recycling the same misleading and hollow arguments that prove nothing more than the emptiness of the case against Harvard. This decision is not surprising given the highly irregular investigation the DOJ has engaged in thus far, and its recent action to repeal Obama-era guidelines on the consideration of race in admission,” the Harvard statement said.
“Harvard does not discriminate against applicants from any group, and will continue to vigorously defend the legal right of every college and university to consider race as one factor among many in college admissions, which the Supreme Court has consistently upheld for more than 40 years. Colleges and universities must have the freedom and flexibility to create the diverse communities that are vital to the learning experience of every student, and Harvard is proud to stand with the many organizations and individuals who are filing briefs in support of this position today,” the statement continued.
The university denies that its practices violate the law, saying that ethnicity is optional on the application and is one of many factors that contribute to getting into the college. In addition, it argues that having a diverse student body contributes to the educational process. All of the other Ivy League schools supported Harvard, court documents show.
The Justice Department also said in a statement that it had separately begun an investigation into Harvard’s admissions process last year based upon a complaint made to it by more than 60 Asian-American organizations.
The organisations that complained to the Justice Department include the Global Organization of Persons of Indian Origin, National Federation of Indian-American Associations, American Society of Engineers of Indian Origin, and BITS Sindri Alumni Association of North India. While under US court rulings universities can use broad criteria like economic status to ensure diversity in admissions, making race the sole factor in a system similar to caste-based reservations in India is illegal.
Although the programs for diversity at many universities are presented as progressive efforts to help historically oppressed minorities like African Americans and Latinos, it is the Whites who actually benefit at the expense of the Asians.
A study by a Princeton University academic found that to gain admission to elite universities, Asian-American students had to score 140 points more than whites in the Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT), which is a common entrance exam used by most universities.
The Justice Department said that “the students and parents who brought this (SFFA) suit have presented compelling evidence that Harvard’s use of race unlawfully discriminates against Asian Americans.”
An evidence that has emerged in the case is Harvard’s use of “personal ratings” that relies on racial and ethnic stereotypes to undermine Asians’ chances of admission. According to a court filing admissions officers were found to use “personal ratings” that gave lower ratings for Asians on subjective criteria like “others like to be around him or her”; has character traits such as “likability... helpfulness, courage, (and) kindness”; “is an attractive person to be with”; “is widely respected”; “is a good person” and “has good human qualities”. The Justice Department said that “the evidence shows that Harvard uses a ‘personal rating’ that may be biased against Asian Americans” because it “admits that, on average, it scores Asian-American applicants lower on this ‘personal rating’ than applicants of other races.” The university said in a court filing in June that it uses “whole person evaluation” and declared it “does not discriminate against applicants of any race including Asians.”